We consider in this paper a Gough-type parallel robot and we present an efficient algorithm based on interval analysis that allows us to solve the forward kinematics, i.e., to determine all the possible poses of the platform for given joint coordinates. This algorithm is numerically robust as numerical round-off errors are taken into account; the provided solutions are either exact in the sense that it will be possible to refine them up to an arbitrary accuracy or they are flagged only as a “possible” solution as either the numerical accuracy of the computation does not allow us to guarantee them or the robot is in a singular configuration. It allows us to take into account physical and technological constraints on the robot (for example, limited motion of the passive joints). Another advantage is that, assuming realistic constraints on the velocity of the robot, it is competitive in term of computation time with a real-time algorithm such as the Newton scheme, while being safer.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bouvet, D. and Garcia, G. 2001. Guaranteed 3-d mobile robot localization using an odometer, an automatic theodolite and indistinguishable landmarks . IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Seoul, South Korea, May 23–25, pp. 3612–3617 .
2.
Carreras, C. et al. 1999. Robot reliability estimation using interval methods. Workshop on Applications of Interval Analysis to Systems and Control, February, pp. 371–385.
3.
Castellet, A. 1998. Solving inverse kinematics problems using an interval method. Ph.D. Thesis, Universitat Politechnica de Catalunya, Barcelona, Spain.
4.
Chablat, D., Wenger, J., and Merlet, J.-P. 2002. Workspace analysis of the Orthoglide using interval analysis . Proceedings of ARK, Calle de Malavada, June 29–July 2, pp. 397–406 .
5.
Collavizza, M., Deloble, F., and Rueher, M. 1999. Comparing partial consistencies . Reliable Computing5: 1–16 .
6.
Didrit, O., Petitot, M., and Walter, E. 1998. Guaranteed solution of direct kinematic problems for general configurations of parallel manipulator . IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation14(2): 259–266 .
7.
Dietmaier, P. 1998. The Stewart–Gough platform of general geometry can have 40 real postures . Proceedings of ARK, Strobl, Austria, June 29–July 4, pp. 7–16 .
8.
Faugère, J. C. and Lazard, D. 1995. The combinatorial classes of parallel manipulators . Mechanism and Machine Theory30(6): 765–776 .
9.
Geist, A. et al. 1994. PVM: Parallel Virtual Machine, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA .
10.
Hansen, E. 1992. Global Optimization Using Interval Analysis, Marcel Dekker, New York .
11.
Husty, M. L. 1996. An algorithm for solving the direct kinematic of Stewart–Gough-type platforms . Mechanism and Machine Theory31(4): 365–380 .
12.
Innocenti, C. 2001. Forward kinematics in polynomial form of the general Stewart platform . ASME Journal of Mechanical Design123: 254–260 .
13.
Jaulin, L., Kieffer, M., Didrit, O., and Walter, E. 2001. Applied Interval Analysis, Springer-Verlag, Berlin .
14.
Kiyoharu, T., Ohara, F., and Hiromasa, H. 2001. Fast interval bisection method for finding all solutions of nonlinear equations and its application to inverse kinematics for general manipulators . Transactions of the Institute of Electrical Engineers of Japan, Part C120-C(4): 590–596 .
15.
Lazard, D. 1992. Stewart platform and Gröbner basis . Proceedings of ARK, Ferrare, Italy, September 7–9, pp. 136–142 .
16.
Lee, T.-Y. and Shim, J.-K. 2001a. Forward kinematics of the general 6-6 Stewart platform using algebraic elimination . Mechanism and Machine Theory36: 1073–1085 .
17.
Lee, T.-Y. and Shim, J.-K. 2001b. Elimination-based solution method for the forward kinematics of the general Stewart– Gough platform . Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop on Computational Kinematics, F. C. Park and C. C. Iurascu, editors, May 20–22, pp. 259–267 .
18.
Liu, A.-X. and Yang, T.-L. 1995. Configuration analysis of a class of parallel structures using improved continuation . 9thWorld Congress on the Theory of Machines and Mechanisms, Milan, Italy, August 30–September 2, pp. 155–158 .
19.
Merlet, J.-P. 1999. Determination of 6dworkspaces of Goughtype parallel manipulator and comparison between different geometries . International Journal of Robotics Research18(9): 902–916 .
20.
Merlet, J.-P. and Daney, D. 2001. A formal-numerical approach to determine the presence of singularity within the workspace of a parallel robot . Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop on Computational Kinematics, F. C. Park and C. C. Iurascu, editors, Seoul, South Korea, May 20–22, pp. 167–176 .
21.
Moore, R. E. 1979. Methods and Applications of Interval Analysis, SIAM Studies in Applied Mathematics.
22.
Neumaier, A. 1990. Interval Methods for Systems of Equations, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK .
23.
Neumaier, A. 2001. Introduction to Numerical Analysis, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK .
24.
Piazzi, A. and Visioli, A. 1997. A global optimization approach to trajectory planning for industrial robots. International Conference on Intelligent Robotics and Systems(IROS), Grenoble, France , pp. 1553–1559.
25.
Raghavan, M. 1991. The Stewart platform of general geometry has 40 Iconfigurations . ASME Design and Automation Conference, Chicago, IL, September 22–25, Vol. 32-2, pp. 397–402 .
26.
Ratscheck, H. and Rokne, J. 1995. Interval methods. Handbook of Global Optimization, R. Horst and P. M. Pardalos, editors, Kluwer, Dordrecht , pp. 751–819.
27.
Revol, N. and Rouillier, F. 2002. Motivations for an arbitrary precision interval arithmetics and the MPFI library . Validated Computing Conference, Toronto, Canada, May 23–25.
28.
Ronga, F. and Vust, T. 1992. Stewart platforms without computer? Conference on Real Analytic and Algebraic Geometry, Trento, Italy , pp. 97–212.
29.
Rouillier, F. 1995. Real roots counting for some robotics problems. Computational Kinematics, J.-P. Merlet and B. Ravani, editors, Kluwer, Dordrecht , pp. 73–82.
30.
Rouillier, F. 2003. Efficient real solutions and robotics . First EMS–SMAI–SMF Joint Conference on Applied Mathematics and Applications of Mathematics, Nice, France, February 10–13.
31.
Sreenivasan, S. V. and Nanua, P. 1992. Solution of the direct position kinematics problem of the general Stewart platform using advanced polynomial continuation . 22nd Biennial Mechanisms Conference, Scottsdale, AZ, September 13–16, pp. 99–106 .
32.
Tagawa, K., Ohara, F., Ohta, Y., and Haneda, H. 1999. Direct inverse kinematics using fast interval bisection method and its automatic programming. ICAR, Tokyo, Japan , pp. 497–502.
33.
Tagawa, K. et al. 2001. Optimal configuration problem of redundant arms considering endpoint compliance and its solution using interval analysis . Transactions of the Society of Instrument and Control Engineers37(10).
34.
Tapia, R. A. 1971. The Kantorovitch theorem for Newton’s method . American Mathematic Monthly78(1.ea): 389–392 .
35.
Van Hentenryck, P., Michel, L., and Deville, Y. 1997. Numerica: A Modeling Language for Global Optimization, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA .
36.
Wampler, C. W. 1996. Forward displacement analysis of general six-in-parallel SPS (Stewart) platform manipulators using soma coordinates . Mechanism and Machine Theory31(3): 331–337 .
37.
Yamamura, K., Kawata, H., and Tokue, A. 1998. Interval solution of nonlinear equations using linear programming . BIT38(1): 186–199 .
