Comparison of the efficiency of five observability indices for robot calibration

Abstract The purpose of this work is to evaluate the efficiency of five observability indices commonly used in robot calibration. For illustrative purposes, the study is performed in the case of an actual five-bar parallel robot and another three-degrees-of-freedom planar parallel robot, which are modeled with twelve geometric parameters each. A two-degrees-of-freedom planar serial robot is also considered. For each of the observability indices, a simulation study is performed for one hundred robot units (i.e. one hundred different sets of errors imposed on the parameters), four different numbers of calibration configurations, and four different levels of measurement noise. Results show that, in the case of low levels of measurement noise, all five observability indices yield excellent improvement in robot position accuracy. The interest of choosing an appropriate observability index becomes evident for high levels of measurement noises, and the comparison of the robot accuracy obtained by using each observability index becomes interesting. The results show that there is an observability index, which can be considered as the best choice (i.e. it is the best index in the most cases of our simulated robots).

[1]  Toby J. Mitchell,et al.  An algorithm for the construction of “ D -optimal” experimental designs , 2000 .

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

[3]  Wisama Khalil,et al.  Modeling, Identification and Control of Robots , 2003 .

[4]  Ilian A. Bonev,et al.  Development of a Five-Bar Parallel Robot With Large Workspace , 2010 .

[5]  Jens Kotlarski,et al.  Dynamics identification of kinematically redundant parallel robots using the direct search method , 2012 .

[6]  Damien Chablat,et al.  Working modes and aspects in fully parallel manipulators , 1998, Proceedings. 1998 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (Cat. No.98CH36146).

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

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

[9]  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.

[10]  Kuang-Chao Fan,et al.  Identification of strut and assembly errors of a 3-PRS serial-parallel machine tool , 2004 .

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

[12]  Miomir Vukobratović,et al.  Calibration and accuracy of manipulation robot models—An overview , 1994 .

[13]  Damien Chablat,et al.  The Kinematic Analysis of a Symmetrical Three-Degree-of-Freedom Planar Parallel Manipulator , 2007, ArXiv.

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

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

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

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

[18]  Nicolas Andreff,et al.  Interval method for calibration of parallel robots : Vision-based experiments , 2006 .

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

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

[21]  Ilian A. Bonev,et al.  A novel XY-Theta precision table and a geometric procedure for its kinematic calibration , 2012 .

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

[23]  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.

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

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

[26]  Xiao-Dong Ren,et al.  A new calibration method for parallel kinematics machine tools using orientation constraint , 2009 .

[27]  D. Chetwynd,et al.  A general and novel approach for parameter identification of 6-DOF parallel kinematic machines , 2005 .

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

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

[30]  Bijan Shirinzadeh,et al.  A systematic technique to estimate positioning errors for robot accuracy improvement using laser interferometry based sensing , 2005 .

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