Flexible Manipulators: Modeling, Analysis and Optimum Design

Index

Chapter 1

Introduction

Chapter Outline

1.1 Background and Problem Statement

1.2 Motivations

1.3 Organization of the Book

References

1.1 Background and Problem Statement

The difference between a flexible and a rigid manipulator can be explained both physically and mathematically. In terms of physics, a rigid manipulator has theoretically only one fundamental frequency of vibration with an infinite value, and thus can move at any desired speed without significant tip deflection and body deformation, leading to a large link mass and a correspondingly low energy efficiency; a flexible manipulator, on the other hand, has many fundamental frequencies of vibration with finite values and thus can experience significant tip deflection under normal operating conditions. The oscillation becomes severe when its speed approaches one of its fundamental frequencies, so it is of low mass but is very difficult to operate. In mathematical terms, a rigid manipulator can only have a finite number of degrees of freedom (DOF), described by ordinary differential equations. A flexible manipulator will have an infinite number of DOF, and thus has to be specified by partial differential equations, so-called distributed parameter systems.

Compared with rigid robotic manipulators, flexible ones are more efficient and safer to operate due to their lightness, good damping behavior, and less pronounced interconnections between different segments of multiple arm links. However, they are much more difficult to control and operate than their rigid counterparts due to their flexibility. Examples of flexible manipulators can be found in space exploration, such as the NASA Remote Manipulator System; in mining operations, such as robotic excavators; in construction applications, such as robotic crane systems, and so on. In those situations, size, mass, payload, speed, environmental or task constraint factors make the flexibility of a robotic manipulator an important issue with respect to its design, modeling, analysis, control, and operation.

For example, the NASA Remote Manipulator System has very low natural frequencies ranging from 0.04 to 0.35 Hz and consequently it has to move slowly at a speed of 0.5°/s to avoid vibrations due to its large mass (450 kg) and heavy payload (27,200 kg) [1]. Other operational problems in flexible manipulators can be found in the literature [2].

The objective of this book is to provide a unified approach that simultaneously considers all factors in mechanical, electrical, sensing, and control components to address modeling, analysis, optimization, and control of flexible manipulators. Specifically, we will investigate the following problems:

1. Modeling of flexible manipulators

Modeling is the first step in the design, analysis, and control of flexible manipulators. Many and various models, from linear to nonlinear, from numerical to analytical, have been proposed in the literature. However, their accuracy, complexity, and overall efficiency have not been investigated systematically up to now. In this book, we will carry out a systematic study of these models and compare their pros and cons with respect to specific design and control problems, especially trade-offs between benefits and costs.

2. Analysis of flexible manipulators

Various model-specific analytical papers have been published, but no thorough comparative investigation of these analyses has ever been conducted. In addition, very few studies with quantitative results have been reported in the literature on the effect of size, shape, mass distribution, tip load, and other factors on the dynamics and operational performance of flexible manipulators. However, such analyses are critical to the effectiveness of any model for optimization and control purposes. Here, we will address these issues with systematic but specific numerical investigations based on the currently available dynamic models.

3. Optimization of flexible manipulators

Two conventional dual optimal design problems have been well studied in our previous research: (a) Given a fixed mass for the link, find a shape that maximizes its speed; and (b) given a fixed speed for the link, find a shape that minimizes its mass. However, the formulations used for optimization in the previous studies are too simple for real-world applications. To make those designs useful, we must include complicated constraints that are encountered in reality. In most of these cases, analytical procedures developed previously would no longer be applicable. We must look into new methods for optimal design problems with meaningful constraints.

4. Mechatronic design of flexible manipulators

The complexity of a manipulator system is due to the interrelation and interdependency of its subsystems, for example its kinematic system (mainly the beam or link structure), control system, driver system (mainly the actuation mechanism), and measuring or sensing system. In traditional design, a manipulator’s link structure is designed first, followed by its driver system, then a measuring system, and finally its control system. This leads to a sequential design process and a locally optimal solution, and therefore the potential of a flexible manipulator is rarely fully realized. To overcome such problems, a concurrent design procedure that integrates all subsystems must be undertaken, namely a mechatronic approach must be considered in the design of flexible manipulators.

1.2 Motivations

First of all, this book presents a unified and systematic approach that deals with the modeling, analysis, optimization, and mechatronic design of flexible manipulators. This approach will enable us to deal with various issues in the design and operation of flexible manipulators so that both analytical and numerical procedures, especially new methods in optimization in the field of computational intelligence, can be applied.

Secondly, with this unified approach we have developed a different methodology for the design of flexible manipulators that deals with their mechanical, electrical, sensing, and control components concurrently instead of sequentially from the very beginning of the design process. Theoretically, this method is capable of finding the global optimal design solution, resulting in a better design outcome.

Thirdly, our approach has opened a new direction in the research of flexible manipulators. Currently, most researchers try to simplify beam model complexity by neglecting some less significant factors, such as shear deformation, rotary inertia, viscous and Coulomb friction, or linearizing the model at some particular operating points, in their effort to make real-time control feasible. In the new direction we have proposed here, the focus is to design a better manipulator system so its control problem and the accuracy of the dynamic model will be less critical in its performance. In other words, the result from our proposed mechatronic design is better than that obtained from previous model-intensive or control-intensive designs.

1.3 Organization of the Book

The previous work on related issues of flexible manipulators will be addressed in Chapter 2, while Chapters 3, 4, 5, and 6 discuss modeling, analysis, optimization, and mechatronic design of flexible manipulators respectively. Finally, Chapter 7 summarizes this book and looks into critical efforts that are needed for future research.

REFERENCES

1. Book WJ. Structural flexibility of motion systems in the space environment. IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation. 1993;9(5):524–538.

2. Nguyen PK, Ravindran R, Carr R, Gossain DM, Doetsch KH. Structural Flexibility of the Shuttle Remote Manipulator System Mechanical Arm. SPAR AeroSpace Ltd., Tech. Info. AIAA 1982;.

Chapter 2

Past and Recent Works

Outline

2.1 Earlier Research on Flexible Manipulators

2.2 Recent Work on Flexible Manipulators

References

2.1 Earlier Research on Flexible Manipulators

Interest in the utilization of flexible manipulators for space exploration and automation started in the early 1980s. For example, Nguyen et al. [1] investigated the dynamics and control of the space shuttle manipulator arm. In 1984, Cannon and Schmitz published one of the first papers on the control of flexible manipulators [2]. Book [3] investigated the dynamics of flexible manipulators using a recursive Lagrangian formulation. In 1985, Sakawa et al. [4] considered the feedback control problem inherent in flexible arms. Yang and Donath [5] formulated a dynamic model of a flexible arm that also included the flexibility of the joints.

From the late 1980s to 1990s, there have been a multitude of papers published on control models for flexible manipulators. In 1990, Belvin and Park [6] were one of the first teams to attempt a comprehensive optimization scheme that included both structure and control optimization using cost functions. Khorrami and Özgöner [7] presented a set of integro-partial equations and used a perturbation method for control purposes. A complete study of different dynamic equations under various boundary conditions for flexible manipulators was conducted by Bellezze et al. [8]. Kim and Junkins [9] developed cost functions of total mass, stability, and eigenvalue sensitivity for optimum flexible structures. Park and Asada [10] developed an optimal control design based on a variable point of torque transmission to a flexible link. Asada et al. [11] have addressed the optimal design problem using a finite-element computational model. As part of their effort toward a control-configured flexible arm, they tried to increase the fundamental frequency of vibration through optimum tapering of a beam of varying rectangular cross-section. A theoretical increment of 43% in the fundamental frequency of the manipulator was obtained. De Luca and Siciliano [12] considered the additional factor of gravity in their control model.

The majority of research up to the early 1990s concentrated on the optimization of flexible manipulators from a control perspective. Practically no work was being done on the problem of structural or shape optimization, although some researchers such as Asada, Park, and Rai included shape design as an integral part of an overall control scheme, but with no analytical analysis. In 1991, Wang [13] reexamined the earlier work of Karihaloo and Niordson [14] and found that the Lagrange multiplier in the optimality equations could be removed completely, thus simplifying the iteration scheme considerably. At around the same time, Wang et al. [15] also developed an optimization model for a flexible manipulator and, using the modified iteration scheme, produced the first optimum shapes and frequencies for flexible manipulators. They found that an increase of over 600% in the fundamental frequency of vibration was possible for flexible links of geometrically similar