A real-time simulator for a tree harvester has been developed for training in more effective vehicle and cutter operation and tree management. The equations of motion of the constrained mechanical system of the tree harvester are expressed using a recursive formulation. The hydraulic actuator modelling of the harvester is based on lumped fluid theory, in which the hydraulic circuit is divided into discrete volumes where pressures are assumed to be distributed equally, while pressure wave propagation in pipes and hoses is assumed to be negligible. For modelling purposes, valves are broken up into a number of adjustable restrictors, which can be modelled separately. The contact model used comprises two parts: collision detection and response. Collision detection identifies whether, when and where moving bodies may come in contact. Collision response prevents penetration when contact occurs and identifies how it should behave after collision. A penalty method is used in this study to establish object collision events. The major achievement of this study is combining these three modelling methods in the application of a real-time simulator.
Menghal PM and Jaya Laxmi A. Real time simulation: a novel approach in engineering education. In: 3rd international conference on electronics computer technology (ICECT), Kanyakumari, India, 8–10 April 2011, vol. 1, pp.215–219.
2.
Freedman P, MacKenzie P and Lapointe JF. A computer-based training environment for forestry telemanipulation. In: Proceedings of the international conference on intelligent robots and systems (IROS), Grenoble, France, 7–11 September 1997, vol. 3, pp.1826–1831.
3.
Papadopoulos E and Sarkar S. The dynamics of an articulated forestry machine and its applications. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on robotics and automation, Albuquerque, New Mexico, 20–25 April 1997, vol. 1, 323–328.
4.
Papadopoulos E, Frenette R, Mu B, et al. On the modeling and control of an experimental harvester machine manipulator. In: Proceedings of the international conference on intelligent robots and systems (IROS), Grenoble, France, 7–11 September 1997, vol. 1, pp.323–328.
5.
Fisette P, Bruls O and Swevers J. Multiphysics modeling of mechatronic multibody systems. In: Proceedings of the international conference on noise and vibration engineering (ISMA2006), Leuven, Belgium, 18–20 September 2006, pp.41–67.
6.
SaminJCBrulsOCollardJF. Multiphysics modeling and optimization of mechatronic multibody systems. Multibod Syst Dynam2007; 18: 345–373.
7.
Gonthier Y and Papadopoulos E. On the development of a real-time simulator for an electro-hydraulic forestry machine. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on robotics and automation, Leuven, Belgium, 16–20 May 1998, vol. 1, pp.127–132.
8.
PapadopoulosEMuBFrenetteR. On modeling, identification and control of a heavy-duty electrohydraulic harvester manipulator. IEEE/ASME Trans Mechatron2003; 8(2): 178–187.
9.
ChiangMHHuangCC. Experimental implementation of complex path tracking control for large robotic hydraulic excavator. Int J Adv Manufac Technol2004; 23: 126–132.
10.
Jia H, Li W and Singhoose W. Dynamic modeling and vibration analysis of cherry pickers with flexible arm. J Vib Shock 2010; 29(12): 136–140.
11.
Hongxia J, Wanli L and Singhose W. Using two-mode input shaping to suppress the residual vibration of cherry pickers. In: 3rd international conference on measuring technology and mechatronics automation, Shanghai, China, 6–7 January 2011, vol. 3, pp.1091–1094.
12.
Grott M, Biral F, Oboe R, et al. Semi-active suspension systems for heavy-duty vehicles: multibody model development, identification and control evaluation. In: ASME international mechanical engineering congress and exposition, vol. 10: mechanical systems and control, Part A and B, Lake Buena Vista, FL, USA, 13–19 November 2009, pp.13–19.
13.
Sarkar S. Dynamic modeling of an articulated forestry machine for simulation and control. MS Thesis, McGill University, Montreal, Canada, 1996.
14.
Freund E, Krämer M and Rosmann J. Towards realistic forest machine simulators. In: AIAA modeling and simulation technologies conference and exhibit, Denver, CO, 14–17 August 2000, paper no. AIAA-2000-4095, p.1.
15.
BaeDSHaugEJ. A recursive formulation for constrained mechanical system dynamics: part 1. Open loop system. Mech Struct Mach1987; 15(3): 359–382.
16.
HookerWMarguliesG. The dynamical attitude equation for an n-body satellite. J Astronaut Sci1965; 12: 123–128.
17.
FeatherstoneR. The calculation of robot dynamics using articulated-body inertias. Int J Robot Res1983; 2: 13–30.
18.
BaeDSHaugEJ. A recursive formulation for constrained mechanical system dynamic: part II. Closed loop system. Mech Struct Mach1988; 15(4): 481–506.
19.
KimSSHaugEJ. A recursive formulation for flexible multibody dynamics. Part I: open loop system. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng1988; 71: 481–506.
20.
BaeDSHanJMYooHH. A generalized recursive formulation for constrained mechanical system dynamic. Mech Struct Mach1999; 27(3): 293–315.
21.
Slaats PMA. Recursive formulations in multibody dynamics. Report, computational mechanics, Technische Universiteit Eindhoven, December 1991.
22.
RahnejatH. Multi-body dynamics: vehicles, machines and mechanism, London: Professional Engineering Publishing, 1998, p.370.
23.
AvelloAJimenezJMBayoE. A simple and highly parallelizable method for real-time dynamic simulation based on velocity transformation. Comput Meth Appl Mech Eng1993; 107(3): 313–339.
24.
HaugEJ. Computer aided kinematics and dynamics of mechanical systems. Volume I: basic methods, Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon, 1989, p.500.
25.
Garcia de JalonJBayoE. Kinematic and dynamic simulation of multibody systems: the real-time challenge, New York: Springer-Verlag, 1994.
26.
WattonJ. Fluid power system: Modelling, simulation, analog and microcomputer control, London: Prentice Hall International (UK) Ltd, 1989, p.490.
27.
HandroosHMVileniusMJ. Flexible semi-empirical models for hydraulic flow control valves. J Mech Des1991; 113(3): 232–238.
28.
Amrmstrong-HelouvryBDupontPDe WitCC. A survey of models, analysis tools and compensation methods for the control of machines with friction. Automatica1994; 30: 1083–1138.
29.
BlundellMHartyD. The multibody system approach to vehicle dynamics, Oxford, UK, Burlington, MA: Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann, 2004, pp. 518–518.
30.
EbrahimiSEberhardPAspects of contact problems in computational multibody dynamics. In: García Orden JuanCarlosGoicolea JoséMCuadradoJavier (eds). Multibody dynamics: computational methods and applications, The Netherlands: Springer, 2007, pp. 23–47.
31.
Moisio S, Korkealaakso PM and Rouvinen AJ. Contact modeling in real-time simulation of an underground wheeled loader. In: The 1st joint international conference on multibody system dynamics, Lappeenranta, Finland, 25–27 May 2010, p.64.
32.
DrumwrightE. A fast and stable penalty method for rigid body simulation. IEEE Trans Visual Comput Graphics2008; 14(1): 231–240.
33.
Escalona JL, Gonzalez M, Zaazaa KE, et al. A technique for validating a multibody wheel/rail contact algorithm. In: Proceeding of DETC’03. ASME 2003 design engineering technical conferences and computers and information in engineering conference, Chicago, USA, 2003.
34.
Anitescu M. A fixed time-step approach for multibody dynamic with contact and friction. In: International conference on intelligent robots and system, Las Vegas, NV, 27 October–1 November 2003, vol. 4, pp.3725–3731.
35.
Johnson KL. Contact mechanics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1987, pp.1--468.
36.
EbrahimiSHippmannGEberhardP. Extension of the polygonal contact model for flexible multibody systems. Int J Appl Math Mech2005; 1: 33–50.
37.
RouvinenAJLehtinenTKorkealaaksoPM. Container gantry crane simulator for operator training. Proc IMechE Part K: J Multi-body Dynamics2005; 219: 325–336.
38.
Drumwright E and Sheel DA. An evaluation of methods for modeling contact in multibody simulation. In: IEEE international conference on robotics and automation, Shanghai International Conference Center, Shanghai, China, 9–13 May 2011, pp.1695–1701.
39.
RedonSKheddaryACoquillartS. Fast continuous collision detection between rigid bodies. Comp Graphics Forum2002; 21(3): 279–288.
40.
LaiKCKangSC. Collision detection strategies for virtual construction simulation. Automat Construct2009; 18(6): 724–736.
41.
Zachmann G. Rapid collision detection by dynamically aligned DOP-trees. In: Proceedings of the IEEE virtual reality annual international symposium, Atlanta, GA, 14–18 March 1998, pp.90–97.
42.
Gottschalk S, Lin MC and Manocha D. OBBTree: a hierarchical structure for rapid interference detection. In: Computer graphics (SIGGRAPH ’96 proceedings) proceedings of the 23rd annual conference on computer graphics, New Orleans, LA, 4–9 August 1996, pp.171–180.
43.
Muth B, Muller MK, Eberhard P, et al. Collision detection and administration methods for many particles with different sizes. In: 4th international conference on discrete element methods, DEM 2007, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia, 27–29 August 2007.
44.
MooreMWilhelmsJ. Collision detection and response for computer animation. Comp Graphic1998; 22(4): 289–298.
45.
HippmannG. An algorithm for compliant contact between complexly shaped bodies. Multibod Syst Dynam2004; 12: 345–362.
46.
Hippmann G. An algorithm for compliant contact between complexly shaped surfaces in multibody dynamics. In: Jorge AC Ambrósio (ed.) Multibody Dynamics IDMEC/IST, Lisbon, Portugal, 1–4 July 2003, pp.345–362.
47.
HasegawaSSatoM. Real-time rigid body simulation for haptic interactions based on contact volume of polygonal objects. Eurographics2004; 23(3): 529–538.
48.
Hasegawa S, Fujii N, Koike Y, et al. Real-time rigid body simulation based on volumetric penalty method. In: Proceedings of the 11th symposium on haptic interfaces for virtual environment and teleoperator system (HAPTIC), Los Angeles, CA, 22–23 March 2003, pp.326–332.
49.
LiHSchindlerC. Three-dimensional finite element and analytical modeling of tyre-soil interaction. Proc IMechE Part K: J Multi-body Dynamics2013; 227(1): 42–60.
50.
SharafAMRahnejatHKingPD. Analysis of handling characteristics of all-wheel-drive off-road vehicles. Int J Heavy Vehicle Syst2008; 1: 89–106.
51.
Canudas de WitCAstromKJLischinskyP. A new model for control of systems with friction. IEEE Trans Automat Cont1995; 40(3): 419–425.
Canudas de WitCTsiotrasPVelenisE. Dynamic friction models for road/tire longitudinal interaction. Vehicle Syst Dynam2003; 39: 189–226.
54.
Canudas de Wit C and Tsiotras P. Dynamic tire friction models for vehicle traction control. In: Proceedings of the 38th IEEE conference on decision and control, Phoenix, AZ, USA, 7–10 December 1999; vol. 4, pp.3746–3751.
55.
DoNBFerriAABauchauOA. Efficient simulation of a dynamic system with LuGre friction. J Comput Nonlinear Dynam2007; 2: 281–281.
56.
OlssonHAstromKJCanudas de WitC. Friction models and friction compensation. Eur J Control1998; 4: 176–195.
57.
KorkealaaksoPMRouvinenAJMoisioSM. Development of real-time simulation environment. Multibod Syst Dynam2007; 17: 177–194.
