Kinematic Performance Analysis and Comparison for the Exechon-like PKMs Based on a Kinematic Tuning Index

  • Tengfei Tang
  • Hanliang Fang
  • Jun ZhangEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Mechanisms and Machine Science book series (Mechan. Machine Science, volume 73)


Performance evaluation is a key issue for design and optimization of parallel kinematic machines (PKMs). Performance indices can provide valuable enhancements for improving performances of PKMs, in particular if they can account for several different performance indices with one comprehensive index. In order to formulate a suitable performance index, a comprehensive kinematic index, the kinematic tuning index (abbreviated to KTI), is formulated with the application of sort, while avoiding the variant units and amplitudes of different performance indices. Taking four types of Exechon-like PKMs, Exechon, Exe-Variant, Exe-I and Exe-II PKM, as examples, the proposed novel index KTI is applied to reveal the kinematic performances of the Exechon-like PKMs. The investigation results indicate that the Exe-I PKM with the topological architecture of 2UPR&1RPS claims the most excellent kinematic performances between the presented PKMs. Notably, with minor revisions, the proposed performance index can be extended and applied to other types of PKMs to provide useful guidances for structural optimization and rigidity enhancement in a comprehensive and efficient manner.


Parallel kinematic machine Kinematic analysis Kinematic performance Performance index 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.



This work was jointly supported by the Open Fund of the Fujian Provincial Industrial Robots and Basic Components Technology Research and Development Center (No. 2014H2004) and National Science Foundation of China (NSFC Grant No.51875105).


  1. 1.
    Dong W., Du Z., Xiao Y., et al.: Development of a parallel kinematic motion simulator platform. Mechatronics 23(1), 154–161 (2013).,:.Author, F.: Article title. Journal 2(5), 99–110 (2016).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dasgupta B., Mruthyunjaya T. S.: The Stewart platform manipulator: a review. Mechanism and machine theory, 35(1), 15–40 (2000).MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mo J., Shao Z. F., Guan L., et al.: Dynamic performance analysis of the X4 high-speed pick-and-place parallel robot. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing, 46, 48–57 (2017).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Wu G., Bai S., Hjørnet P.: Architecture optimization of a parallel schönflies-motion robot for pick-and-place applications in a predefined workspace. Mechanism and Machine Theory, 106, 148–165 (2016).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wang D., Wu J., Wang L., et al.: A method for designing control parameters of a 3-DOF parallel tool head. Mechatronics, 41, 102–113. 2017,CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chen X., Liu X. J., Xie F. G., et al.: A comparison study on motion/force transmissibility of two typical 3-DoF parallel manipulators: the sprint Z3 and A3 tool heads. International Journal of Advanced Robotic Systems, 11(1), 1–10 (2014).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Li M., Huang T., Mei J., et al.: Dynamic formulation and performance comparison of the 3-DOF modules of two reconfigurable PKM—the tricept and the trivariant. Journal of Mechanical Design, 127(6), 1129–1136 (2005).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Jiang Y., Li T, Wang L.: The dynamic modeling, redundant-force optimization, and dynamic performance analyses of a parallel kinematic machine with actuation redundancy. Robotica, 33(2), 241–263 (2015).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jiang Y., Li T., Wang L.: Dynamic modeling and redundant force optimization of a 2-DOF parallel kinematic machine with kinematic redundancy. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing, 32, 1–10 (2015).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lian B., Sun T., Song Y., et al.: Stiffness analysis and experiment of a novel 5-DoF parallel kinematic machine considering gravitational effects. International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture, 95, 82–96 (2015).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jin Y., Bi Z., Gibson R., et al.: Kinematic analysis of a new over-constrained parallel kinematic machine. In: Proceedings of the 13th World Congress in Mechanism and Machine Science, pp. A7–282. Mexico, IFToMM (2011).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Huang T., Li M., Zhao X. M., et al.: Conceptual design and dimensional synthesis for a 3- DOF module of the TriVariant-a novel 5-DOF reconfigurable hybrid robot. IEEE Transactions on Robotics, 21(3), 449–456 (2005).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Liu X. J., Han G., Xie F., et al.: A novel acceleration capacity index based on motion/force transmissibility for high-speed parallel robots. Mechanism and Machine Theory, 126, 155– 170 (2018).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Huang G., Guo S., et al.: Kinematic analysis and multi-objective optimization of a new re- configurable parallel mechanism with high stiffness. Robotica, 36(2), 187–203 (2018).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Zhang J., Fang H., Tang T.: Two comprehensive indices–based static performance evaluation for the tripod parallel kinematic machine. Advances in Mechanical Engineering, 9(11), 1–14 (2017).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Huang Z., Li Q., Ding H.: Theory of parallel mechanisms. Springer Science & Business Media, London (2012).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Tang T., Zhao Y., Zhang J., et al.: Conceptual design and workspace analysis of an Exechon-inspired parallel kinematic machine. In: Ding X (eds) Advances in reconfigurable mechanisms and robots II, pp. 445–453, Springer, Switzerland (2016).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Mechanical Engineering and Automation, Fuzhou UniversityFuzhou, FujianChina

Personalised recommendations