A Theory of Generalized Inverses Applied to Robotics

Robokcs research has made extensive use of techniques based on me Moore-Penrose inverse, or generalized inverse, of matri als. Recently it has been pointed out how noninvariant results may, in general, be obtained by applying these techniques to other areas of robotics, namely hybrid control and inverse ve locity kinematics. Unfortunately, the problems are not restricted to just these particular areas in robotics but are connected with misleading definitions of the metric properties of the six- dimensional wrench and twist vector spaces used in robotics. The current definitions lead to inconsistent results (i.e., results that are not invariant with respect to changes in the reference frame andlor changes in the dimensional units used to express the problem. As a matter of fact, given a linear system u = Ax, where the matrix A may be singular, the Moore-Penrose theory of generalized inverses may be properly and directly applied only when the vector space U of vector u and the vector space X of vector x are inner product spaces. Arbitrary assignment of Euclidean inner products to the space U and X when the vectors u and x have elements with different physical units can lead to inconsistent and noninvariant results. In this article the problem of inconsistent, noninvariant solutions X s to u = Ax in robotics is briefly reviewed and a general theory for com puting consistent, gauge-invariant solutions to nonhomogeneous systems of the form u = Ax is developed. In addition, the dual relationship between rigid-body kinematics and statics is de fined formally as a particular, linear algebraic system whose solution system is also a dual system. Examples illustrate the theory.

[1]  M. C. Pease,et al.  Methods of Matrix Algebra , 1965 .

[2]  D. E. Whitney,et al.  The mathematics of coordinated control of prosthetic arms and manipulators. , 1972 .

[3]  Adi Ben-Israel,et al.  Generalized inverses: theory and applications , 1974 .

[4]  John J. Craig,et al.  A systematic method of hybrid position/force control of a manipulator , 1979, COMPSAC.

[5]  Matthew T. Mason,et al.  Compliance and Force Control for Computer Controlled Manipulators , 1981, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

[6]  Charles A. Klein,et al.  Review of pseudoinverse control for use with kinematically redundant manipulators , 1983, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

[7]  H. Harry Asada,et al.  A method for the design of hybrid position/Force controllers for manipulators constrained by contact with the environment , 1985, Proceedings. 1985 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[8]  Joseph Duffy,et al.  Hybrid Twist and Wrench Control for a Robotic Manipulator , 1988 .

[9]  Jean-Jacques E. Slotine,et al.  Robot analysis and control , 1988, Autom..

[10]  Dragomir N. Nenchev,et al.  Redundancy resolution through local optimization: A review , 1989, J. Field Robotics.

[11]  Yoshihiko Nakamura,et al.  Advanced robotics - redundancy and optimization , 1990 .

[12]  Claudio Bonivento,et al.  On the invariance of the hybrid position/force control , 1990, J. Intell. Robotic Syst..

[13]  C. Melchiorri Conisiderations About the Use of Minimum Norm Criteria for the Solution of Kinematic Problems , 1990, 1990 American Control Conference.

[14]  Joseph Duffy,et al.  The fallacy of modern hybrid control theory that is based on "orthogonal complements" of twist and wrench spaces , 1990, J. Field Robotics.

[15]  Keith L. Doty,et al.  Kinestatic Filtering for Hybrid Control of Constrained Rigid Body Motion , 1991 .

[16]  Joseph Duffy,et al.  Kinestatic Control: A Novel Theory for Simultaneously Regulating Force and Displacement , 1991 .