On the role of robot configuration in Cartesian stiffness control

Abstract

The stiffness ellipsoid, i.e. the locus of task-space forces obtained corresponding to a deformation of unit norm in different directions, has been extensively used as a powerful representation of robot interaction capabilities. The size and shape of the stiffness ellipsoid at a given end-effector posture are influenced by both joint control parameters and - for redundant manipulators - by the chosen redundancy resolution configuration. As is well known, impedance control techniques ideally provide control parameters which realize any desired shape of the Cartesian stiffness ellipsoid at the end-effector in an arbitrary non-singular configuration, so that arm geometry selection could appear secondary. This definitely contrasts with observations on how humans control their arm stiffness, who in fact appear to predominantly use arm configurations to shape the stiffness ellipsoid. To understand this discrepancy, we provide a more complete analysis of the task-space force/deformation behavior of redundant arms, which explains why arm geometry also plays a fundamental role in interaction capabilities of a torque controlled robot. We show that stiffness control of realistic robot models with bounds on joint torques can't indeed achieve arbitrary stiffness ellipsoids at any given arm configuration. We first introduce the notion of maximum allowable Cartesian force/displacement (“stiffness feasibility”) regions for a compliant robot. We show that different robot configurations modify such regions, and explore the role of different configurations in defining the performance limits of Cartesian stiffness controllers. On these bases, we design a stiffness control method that suitably exploits both joint control parameters and redundancy resolution to achieve desired task-space interaction behavior

Variable stiffness identification and configuration optimization of industrial robots for machining tasks

“…λ d is the semiaxis of the elliptical section's normal vector. The square root of the three half axis length respectively represents the stiffness values of the three axes in the robot tool coordinate system [27,28]. Thus, stiffness ellipsoid can be written according to the definition formula of ellipsoid as:…”

Stiffness Control of Deformable Robots Using Finite Element Modeling

“…This takes two main forms: active impedance control [3] using a fast feedback loop and passive (but sometimes controllable) compliance in the joints. The dependence of Cartesian end-effector stiffness on robot configuration has been studied in detail including for redundant [4], [5], [6] and parallel manipulators [7]. Firouzeh et al used adjustable stiffness joints to control the compliance of a gripper [8].…”

An Augmented Discrete-Time Approach for Human-Robot Collaboration

“…This means we can adapt our arm stiffness by muscle cocontraction as well as arm pose change, while, in this paper, we mainly investigate the effect of arm pose on interacting with external forces. According to [50], human endpoint stiffness in Cartesian space can be denoted by muscle stiffness and postural stiffness in…”