Safe and intuitive manual guidance of a robot manipulator using adaptive admittance control towards robot agility

Abstract Key areas of robot agility include methods that increase capability and flexibility of industrial robots and facilitate robot re-tasking. Manual guidance can achieve robot agility effectively, provided that a safe and smooth interaction is guaranteed when the user exerts an external force on the end effector. We approach this by designing an adaptive admittance law that can adjust its parameters to modify the robot compliance in critical areas of the workspace, such as near and on configuration singularities, joint limits, and workspace limits, for a smooth and safe operation. Experimental validation was done with two tests: a constraint activation test and a 3D shape tracing task. In the first one, we validate the proper response to constraints and in the second one, we compare the proposed approach with different admittance parameter tuning strategies using a drawing task where the user is asked to guide the robot to trace a 3D profile with an accuracy or speed directive and evaluate performance considering path length error and execution time as metrics, and a questionnaire for user perception. Results show that appropriate response to individual and simultaneous activation of the aforementioned constraints for a safe and intuitive manual guidance interaction is achieved and that the proposed parameter tuning strategy has better performance in terms of accuracy, execution time, and subjective evaluation of users.

[1]  Bruno Siciliano,et al.  Variable Impedance Control of Redundant Manipulators for Intuitive Human–Robot Physical Interaction , 2015, IEEE Transactions on Robotics.

[2]  Nikos A. Aspragathos,et al.  Manipulator performance constraints in human-robot cooperation , 2018 .

[3]  Christian Ott,et al.  Unified Impedance and Admittance Control , 2010, 2010 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[4]  Toru Tsumugiwa,et al.  Variable impedance control based on estimation of human arm stiffness for human-robot cooperative calligraphic task , 2002, Proceedings 2002 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (Cat. No.02CH37292).

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

[6]  Jochen J. Steil,et al.  A User Study on Personalized Stiffness Control and Task Specificity in Physical Human–Robot Interaction , 2017, Front. Robot. AI.

[7]  S. Vougioukas,et al.  Bias Estimation and Gravity Compensation For Force-Torque Sensors , 2001 .

[8]  Sami Haddadin,et al.  Physical Human-Robot Interaction , 2016, Springer Handbook of Robotics, 2nd Ed..

[9]  Harry N. Boone,et al.  Analyzing Likert Data , 2012, Journal of Extension.

[10]  Toru Tsumugiwa,et al.  Stability Analysis for Impedance Control of Robot in Human-Robot Cooperative Task System , 2007 .

[11]  Tesheng Hsiao,et al.  Online motion adjustment using compliance control for a multi-axis robot manipulator , 2017, 2017 International Automatic Control Conference (CACS).

[12]  Clément Gosselin,et al.  Variable admittance control of a four-degree-of-freedom intelligent assist device , 2012, 2012 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[13]  Rajiv V. Dubey,et al.  A weighted least-norm solution based scheme for avoiding joint limits for redundant joint manipulators , 1993, IEEE Trans. Robotics Autom..

[14]  Clément Gosselin,et al.  Variable Admittance for pHRI: From Intuitive Unilateral Interaction to Optimal Bilateral Force Amplification , 2018, Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing.

[15]  Arno H. A. Stienen,et al.  Admittance control for physical human–robot interaction , 2018, Int. J. Robotics Res..

[16]  Clément Gosselin,et al.  General Model of Human-Robot Cooperation Using a Novel Velocity Based Variable Impedance Control , 2007, Second Joint EuroHaptics Conference and Symposium on Haptic Interfaces for Virtual Environment and Teleoperator Systems (WHC'07).

[17]  Jürgen Roßmann,et al.  Physics-based simulation for manual robot guidance-An eRobotics approach , 2017 .

[18]  Sarosh H. Patel,et al.  Manipulator Performance Measures - A Comprehensive Literature Survey , 2015, J. Intell. Robotic Syst..

[19]  Tsuneo Yoshikawa,et al.  Manipulability of Robotic Mechanisms , 1985 .

[20]  Alessandro De Luca,et al.  Admittance Control for Human-Robot Interaction Using an Industrial Robot Equipped with a F/T Sensor , 2019, 2019 International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA).

[21]  Antonio Bicchi,et al.  An atlas of physical human-robot interaction , 2008 .

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

[23]  Clément Gosselin,et al.  An anticipative kinematic limitation avoidance algorithm for collaborative robots: Three-dimensional case , 2017, 2017 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS).

[24]  Hikaru Inooka,et al.  Variable impedance control of a robot for cooperation with a human , 1995, Proceedings of 1995 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[25]  Francesco Leali,et al.  Survey on human–robot collaboration in industrial settings: Safety, intuitive interfaces and applications , 2018, Mechatronics.

[26]  Ryojun Ikeura,et al.  Optimal variable impedance control for a robot and its application to lifting an object with a human , 2002, Proceedings. 11th IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Interactive Communication.

[27]  Abdelfetah Hentout,et al.  Human–robot interaction in industrial collaborative robotics: a literature review of the decade 2008–2017 , 2019, Adv. Robotics.

[28]  Neville Hogan,et al.  Impedance Control: An Approach to Manipulation , 1984, 1984 American Control Conference.

[29]  Sotiris Makris,et al.  Human–robot interaction review and challenges on task planning and programming , 2016, Int. J. Comput. Integr. Manuf..

[30]  André Crosnier,et al.  Collaborative manufacturing with physical human–robot interaction , 2016 .