Advertisement

Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology

, Volume 33, Issue 4, pp 1861–1868 | Cite as

Compliance error calibration for robot based on statistical properties of single joint

  • Liang DuEmail author
  • Tie Zhang
  • Xiaoliang Dai
Article
  • 7 Downloads

Abstract

This paper focuses on compliance error calibration. Because kinematic parameter error is the main error of a robot, we should first compensate for it. And because the compliance errors of some joints are too small, not all joints should be compensated for he compliance errors. We rotate the single joint along its axis locked other joints to obtain the statistical properties of all joints. The compliance errors are induced by gravity and elastostatic. This paper presents a mapping from the compliance error onto the joint variable vector; on the other hand, it utilized a method to transform the robot compliance error from the laser tracker system frame to the robot frame. The main attention is paid to analyze each joint compliance error using a single axis rotating by laser tracking system. To compensate the compliance error, we divided this problem into three sequential subtasks: identifying the robot compliance matrix, computing the compliance error of gravity without external loading, compensating compliance errors of elastostatic error on external loading.

Keywords

Compliance error Robot Statistical properties Compensation Laser tracker system 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    Z. S. Roth, B. W. Mooring and B. Ravani, An overview of robot calibration, IEEE J. of Robotics and Automation, RA-3 (1987) 377–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    J. M. Hollerbach and C. W. Wampler, The calibration index and taxonomy for robot kinematic calibration methods, International J. of Robotics Research, 15 (1996) 573–591.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    W. K. Veitschegger and C. H. Wu, Robot calibration and compensation, IEEE J. of Robotics and Automation, 4 (1988) 643–656.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    M. A. Meggiolaro, S. Dubowsky and C. Mavroidis, Geometric and elastic error calibration of a high accracy patient positioning system, Mechanism and Machine Theory, 40 (2005) 415–427.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    W. Khalil and S. Besnard, Geometric calibration robots with flexible joints and links, J. of Intelligent and Robotic Systems, 34 (2002) 357–379.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    A. Gürsel and B. Shirinzadeh, Enhanced stiffness modeling, identification and characterization for robot manipulators, IEEE Transactions on Robotics, 21 (2005) 554–564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    A. Klimchik, Y. Wu and C. Dumas, Identification of geometrical and elastostatic parameters of heavy industrial robots, IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Karlsruhe, Germany (2013).Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    R. P. Judd and A. B. Knasinski, A technique to calibrate industrial robots with experimental verification, IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation, 6 (1990) 20–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    G. Chunhe, Y. Jingxia and N. Jun, Nongeometric error identification and compensation for robotic system by inverse calibration, International J. of Machine Tools & Manufacture, 40 (2000) 2119–2137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    C. Lightcap et al., Improved positioning accuracy of the PA10-6CE robot with geometric and flexibility calibration, IEEE Transactions on Robotics, 24 (2008) 452–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    A. Klimchik et al., Geometric and elastostatic calibration of robotic manipulator using partial pose measurements, Advanced Robotics, 28(21) (2014) 1419–1429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    H. W. Stone and A. C. Sanderson, A prototype arm signature identification system, Proceedings of the 1987 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Piscataway, USA: IEEE (1987) 175–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    H.-N. Nguyen, J. Zhou and H.-J. Kang, A new full pose measurement method for robot calibration, Sensors, 13 (2013) 9132–9147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. [14]
    J. Santolaria and M. Ginés, Uncertainty estimation in robot kinematic calibration, Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing, 29 (2013) 370–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. [15]
    L. Wu, X. Yang and K. Chen, A minimal POE-based model for robotic kinematic calibration with only position measurements, IEEE Transactions on Automation Science and Engineering, 12 (2014) 1477–1483.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    A. Klimchik et al., Advanced robot calibration using partial pose measurements, Methods and Models in Automation and Robotics, 18th International Conference on IEEE (2013).Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    A. Hayati Samad, Robot arm geometric link parameter estimation, Proceedings of the 22nd IEEE conference Decision and Control (1983) 1477–1483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© KSME & Springer 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Mechanical and Automotive EngineeringSouth China University of TechnologyGuangzhouChina
  2. 2.Guangdong Testing Institute for Product Quality SupervisionGuangzhouChina

Personalised recommendations