Control strategies for rodotic contact tasks: An experimental study

In this article, we study the contact instability problem encountered in robotic manipulators while trying to make contact with an environment, such as grasping or pushing against objects, and propose a unified control strategy capable of achieving a stable contact against both stiff and compliant environments. The problem has three distinct stages of the contact task. In the first stage, free-space motion, the robot is approaching the environment; in the second stage, post-contact force regulation; in the third, impact stage, the transition from the first stage to the second. We make an experimental comparison of the control schemes that may be used for the three stages. For example, during impact, the manipulator should not lose contact with the environment, nor exert high impulsive forces on the environment, and in the post-impact phase, the robot should have a fast force trajectory tracking. The best strategies for the above stages are experimentally determined and then combined into a single unified controller that can achieve stable contact as well as a fast force trajectory tracking response for surfaces of variable stiffnesses. This control scheme does not require a priori knowledge of the stiffness of the environment, and is able to estimate the environmental stiffness and tune gains accordingly so as to achieve the best response. Also experimentally compared is the use of such a scheme with impedance control, another method proposed in the literature for robotic contact task control. © 1995 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

[1]  Tzyh Jong Tarn,et al.  Experimental evaluation of the nonlinear feedback robot controller , 1991, Proceedings. 1991 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[2]  D. E. Whitney,et al.  Historical Perspective and State of the Art in Robot Force Control , 1987 .

[3]  Oussama Khatib,et al.  Motion and force control of robot manipulators , 1986, Proceedings. 1986 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[4]  Takeo Kanade,et al.  Experimental Evaluation of Nonlinear Feedback and Feedforward Control Schemes for Manipulators , 1988, Int. J. Robotics Res..

[5]  John T. Wen,et al.  Stability analysis of position and force control for robot arms , 1991 .

[6]  Warren P. Seering,et al.  On dynamic models of robot force control , 1986, Proceedings. 1986 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[7]  Neville Hogan,et al.  An analysis of contact instability in terms of passive physical equivalents , 1989, Proceedings, 1989 International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[8]  Mark R. Cutkosky,et al.  Contact transition control: an experimental study , 1993, [1993] Proceedings IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[9]  John M. Hollerbach,et al.  Nonlinear proportional and derivative control for high disturbance rejection and high gain force control , 1993, [1993] Proceedings IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[10]  Kamal Youcef-Toumi,et al.  Impact and force control , 1989, Proceedings, 1989 International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[11]  Tzyh Jong Tarn,et al.  Nonlinear feedback method of robot control: a preliminary experimental study , 1990, Proceedings., IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[12]  James K. Mills,et al.  Experimental results in manipulator contact task control , 1991, Proceedings. 1991 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[13]  N. Mandal,et al.  Experimental evaluation of the importance of compliance for robotic impact control , 1993, Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Control and Applications.

[14]  Daniel E. Whitney,et al.  Force Feedback Control of Manipulator Fine Motions , 1977 .

[15]  Homayoon Kazerooni,et al.  On the Stability of Robot Compliant Motion Control: Theory and Experiments , 1990 .

[16]  John T. Wen,et al.  Integral force control with robustness enhancement , 1994, IEEE Control Systems.

[17]  Joris De Schutter,et al.  Introducing active linear and nonlinear damping to enable stable high gain force control in case of stiff contact , 1992, Proceedings 1992 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[18]  Pradeep K. Khosla,et al.  Experimental verification of a strategy for impact control , 1991, Proceedings. 1991 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[19]  Warren P. Seering,et al.  Understanding bandwidth limitations in robot force control , 1987, Proceedings. 1987 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[20]  Shahram Payandeh,et al.  Force control strategies for compliant and stiff contact: an experimental study , 1994, Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics.

[21]  Andrew A. Goldenberg Analysis of force control based on linear models , 1992, Proceedings 1992 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[22]  Neville Hogan,et al.  Stable execution of contact tasks using impedance control , 1987, Proceedings. 1987 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[23]  Pradeep K. Khosla,et al.  An Experimental Evaluation and Comparison of Explicit Force Control Strategies for Robotic Manipulators , 1992, 1992 American Control Conference.

[24]  John M. Hollerbach,et al.  Dynamic Stability Issues in Force Control of Manipulators , 1987 .