Inverse Dynamics Approach for Invariant Control of Constrained Robots

  • K. P. Jankowski
  • H. A. Elmaraghy
Conference paper
Part of the International Centre for Mechanical Sciences book series (CISM, volume 361)


A nonlinear feedback control based on inverse dynamics is proposed for redundant robots with rigid or flexible joints during constrained motion task execution. Based on constrained system formalism, the control scheme presented in the paper achieves simultaneous, independent control of both position and contact force at the robot end-effector. The method is based on the introduction of a set of kinematic parameters, which are defined in a new basis of the working space. In this basis, a general inner product characterized by the unity matrix gives rise to the definition of a new set of metrics for the robot task space. Using these metrics, it becomes possible to decompose the twist and wrench spaces into complementary subspaces. This approach contributes to better understanding of the constrained task decomposition, and provides a consistent interpretation of the analytical procedures used for constraint formulation. An example with a three-link robot operating a moving joystick, with constrained orientation of the end-effector, is presented. The results of numerical simulation are used to show the effectiveness of the proposed controller and its robustness to modeling errors.


Contact Force Program Constraint Twist Space Invariant Control Task Space 
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. [1]
    Raibert, M. H., and Craig, J. J., 1981, “Hybrid Position/Force Control of Manipulators,” ASME J. Dyn. Syst. Meas. Control, Vol. 102, pp. 126–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    Mason, M. T., 1981, “Compliance and Force Control for Computer Controlled Manipulators,” IEEE Tr. Syst. Man Cybern., Vol. SMC-11, pp. 418–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    West, H., and Asada, H., 1985, “A Method for the Design of Hybrid Position/Force Controllers for Manipulators Constrained by Contact with the Environment,” Proc. IEEE Conf. Rob. Autom., St. Louis, MO, pp. 251–259.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    Khatib, 0., 1987, “A Unified Approach for Motion and Force Control of Robot Manipulators: The Operational space Formulation,” IEEE J. Rob. Autom., Vol. RA-3, pp. 43–53.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    Yoshikawa, T., 1987, “Dynamic Hybrid Position/Force Control of Robot Manipulators — Description of Hand Constraints and Calculation of Joint Driving Force,” IEEE J. Rob. Autom., Vol. RA-3, pp. 386–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    Kankaanranta, R. K., and Koivo, H. N., 1988, “Dynamics and Simulation of Compliant Motion of a Manipulator,” IEEE J. Rob. Autom., Vol. 4, pp. 163–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    McClamroch, N. H., and Wang, D., 1988, “Feedback Stabilization and Tracking of Constrained Robots,” IEEE Tr. Autom. Control, Vol. 33, pp. 419–426.CrossRefMathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    Jankowski, K. P., and ElMaraghy, H. A., 1991, “Dynamic control of flexible joint robots with constrained end-effector motion,” Prepr. IFAC Symp. Rob. Control SYROCO’91, Vienna, Austria, pp. 345–350.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    Jankowski, K. P., and ElMaraghy, H. A., 1992, “Dynamic Decoupling for Hybrid Control of Rigid-/Flexible-Joint Robots Interacting with the Environment,” IEEE Tr. Rob. Autom., Vol. 8, pp. 519–534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    Jankowski, K. P., and ElMaraghy, H. A., 1992, “Inverse Dynamics and Feedforward Controllers for High Precision Position/Force Tracking of Flexible Joint Robots,” IEEE Conf. Dec. Control, Tucson, AZ, pp. 317–322.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    Lipkin, H., and Duffy, J., 1988, “Hybrid Twist and Wrench Control for a Robotic Manipulator,” Tr. ASME J. Mech. Transm. Autom. Design, Vol. 110, pp. 138–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    Abbati-Marescotti, A., Bonivento, C., and Melchiorri, C., 1990, “On the invariance of the hybrid position/force control,” J. Intel. Rob. Syst., Vol. 3, pp. 233–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    Jankowski, K. P., 1989, “Dynamics of Controlled Mechanical Systems with Material and Program Constraints, Part I-III,” Mech. Mach. Theory, Vol. 24, pp. 175–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. [14]
    Kurdila, A., Papastavridis, J. G., and Kamat, M. P., 1990, “Role of Maggi’s equations in computational methods for constrained multibody systems,” J. Guidance, Vol. 13, pp. 113–120.CrossRefMathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. [15]
    Wen, J. T., and Kreutz-Delgado, K., 1992, “Motion and force control of multiple robotic manipulators,” Automatica, Vol. 28, pp. 729–743.CrossRefMathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. [16]
    Leitmann, G., 1981, “On the efficacy of nonlinear control in uncertain linear systems,” ASME J. Dyn. Syst. Meas. Control, Vol. 102, pp. 95–102.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  17. [17]
    Chen, Y. H., 1988, “Design of robust controllers for uncertain dynamical systems,” IEEE Tr. Autom. Control, Vol. AC-33, pp. 487–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Wien 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • K. P. Jankowski
    • 1
  • H. A. Elmaraghy
    • 1
  1. 1.McMaster UniversityHamiltonCanada

Personalised recommendations