» Download Article

Authors
Erik Wernholt, Svante Gunnarsson

Identifier
10.3182/20060329-3-AU-2901.00016

Index Terms
identification,robotics,flexible arms,friction,manipulators

Abstract
In the work presented here, a three-step identification procedure for rigid body dynamics, friction, and flexibilities, introduced in (Wernholt and Gunnarsson, 2005), will be utilized and extended. Using the procedure, the parameters can be identified only using motor measurements. In the first step, rigid body dynamics and friction will be identified using a separable least squares method, where a friction model describing the Striebeck effect is used. In the second step, initial values for flexibilities are obtained using inverse eigenvalue theory. Finally, in the last step, the remaining parameters of a nonlinear physically parameterized model are identified directly in the time domain. The procedure is exemplified using real data from an experimental industrial robot.

References

[1] Albu-Schäffer, A. and G. Hirzinger (2001). Parameter
    identification and passivity based joint control
    for a 7DOF torque controlled light weight robot.
    In: Proceedings of the 2001 IEEE International
    Conference on Robotics and Automation. Seoul,
    Korea. pp. 2852-2858.
[2] Armstrong-Hélouvry, B., P. Dupont
    and C. Canudas de Wit (1994). A survey of models,
     analysis tools and compensation methods for
    the control of machines with friction. Automatica
    30(7), 1083-1138.
[3] Behi, F. and D. Tesar (1991). Parametric identification
    for industrial manipulators using experimental
    modal analysis. IEEE Transactions on Robotics
    and Automation 7(5), 642-652.
[4] Berglund, E. and G. E. Hovland (2000). Automatic
    elasticity tuning of industrial robot manipulators.
     In: Proceedings of the 39th IEEE Conference
     on Decision and Control. Sydney, Australia.
    pp. 5091-5096.
[5] Gautier, M. and P. Poignet (2001). Extended kalman
    filtering and weighted least squares dynamic
    identification of robot. Control Engineering
    Practice 9(12), 1361-1372.
[6] Golub, G. and V. Pereyra (1973). The differentiation
    of pseudo-inverses and nonlinear least squares
    problems whose variables separate. SIAM Journal
     on Numerical Analysis 10(2), 413-432.
[7] Grotjahn, M., M. Daemi and B. Heimann (2001).
    Friction and rigid body identification of robot
    dynamics. International Journal of Solids and
    Structures 38, 1889-1902.
[8] Isaksson, A., R. Lindkvist, X. Zhang, M. Nordin and
    M. Tallfors (2003). Identification of mechanical
    parameters in drive train systems. In: IFAC System
     Identification Symposium SYSID 2003.
[9] Johansson, R., A. Robertsson, K. Nilsson and M. Verhaegen
     (2000). State-space system identification
    of robot manipulator dynamics. Mechatronics
    10(3), 403-418.
[10] Kozlowski, K. (1998). Modelling and identification
      in robotics. Advances in Industrial Control.
     Springer. London.
[11] Ljung, L. (1999). System Identification: Theory for the
     User. 2nd ed. Prentice Hall. Upper Saddle River,
     New Jersey, USA.
[12] Ljung, L. (2003). System Identification Toolbox -
     User's Guide. The MathWorks Inc. Sherborn,
     MA, USA.
[13] Pintelon, R. and J. Schoukens (2001). System identification:
      a frequency domain approach. IEEE
     Press. New York.
[14] Swevers, J., C. Ganseman, D. B. Tükel, J. De Schutter
      and H. Van Brussel (1997). Optimal robot excitation
      and identification. IEEE Transactions on
     Robotics and Automation 13(5), 730-740.
[15] Wernholt, E. and S. Gunnarsson (2005). Nonlinear
     grey-box identification of industrial robots containing
      flexibilities. In: Proc. 16th IFAC World
     Congress. Prague.
[16] Östring, M., S. Gunnarsson and M. Norrlöf (2003).
     Closed-loop identification of an industrial robot
     containing flexibilities. Control Engineering
     Practice 11, 291-300.