Romansy 14 pp 77-86 | Cite as

Pose, Posture, Formation and Contortion in Kinematic Systems

  • J. Rooney
  • T. K. Tanev
Part of the International Centre for Mechanical Sciences book series (CISM, volume 438)


The concepts of pose, posture, formation and contortion are defined for serial, parallel and hybrid kinematic systems. Workspace and jointspace structure is examined in terms of these concepts. The inter-relationships of pose, posture, formation and contortion are explored for a range of robot workspace and jointspace types.


Parallel Manipulator Revolute Joint Joint Variable Prismatic Joint Stewart Platform 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Duffy, J. (1996). Statics and Kinematics with Applications to Robotics. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Duffy, J., Crane, C (1980). A displacement analysis of the general spatial 7-link 7-R mechanism,. Mechanism and Machine Theory 15: 153–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Gosselin, C.M., and Merlet, J-P. (1994). The direct kinematics of planar parallel manipulators: special architectures and number of solutions. Mechanism and Machine Theory 29(8):1083–4210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Hunt, K.H., (1983). Structural kinematics of in-parallel-actuated robot-arms. Journal of Mechanisms, Transmissions, and Automation in Design 105: 705–712.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Hunt, K.H., and Primrose, E.J.F. (1993). Assembly configurations of some on-parallel-actuated manipulators. Mechanism and Machine Theory 28 (1): 31–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Husty, M., (1996). An algorithm for solving ssthe direct kinematics of general Stewart-Gouth platforms. Mechanism and Machine Theory 31 (4): 365–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Lazard, D. and Merlet, J-P. (1994). The (true) Stewart platform has 12 configurations. Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. San Diego: 2160–2165.Google Scholar
  8. Merlet, J-P. (1996). Direct kinematics of planar parallel manipulators. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Minneapolis, Minnesota: 3744–3749.Google Scholar
  9. Raghavan, M. and Roth, B. (1989) Kinematic analysis of the 6R manipulator of general geometry. In Miura, H. and Arimoto, S. (eds), The Fifth International Symposium on Robotics Research, MA: MIT Press, 314–320.Google Scholar
  10. Rooney, J., and Duffy, J. (1972). On the closure of spatial mechanisms. Proceedings of the 12th ASME Mechanisms Conference & International Symposium on Gearing and Transmissions. San Francisco, CA, USA: paper no. 72-Mech-77.Google Scholar
  11. Rooney, J., and Earl, C.F. (1983). Manipulator postures and kinematic assembly configurations. Proceedings of the Sixth World Congress on Theory of Machines and Mechanisms, New Delhi, India: 1014–1020.Google Scholar
  12. Taney, T.K. (1998). Forward displacement analysis of a three-legged four-degree-of-freedom parallel manipulator. In Lenarcic, J. and Husty, M.L. (eds), Advances in Robot Kinematics: Analysis and Control, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht: 147–154.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Wien 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. Rooney
    • 1
  • T. K. Tanev
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Design and Innovation, Faculty of TechnologyThe Open UniversityUK

Personalised recommendations