Sei sulla pagina 1di 7

Dynamic Model Identification for Industrial

Robots
Ngoc Dung Vuong, Marcelo H. Ang Jr.
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Engineering Faculty
National University of Singapore
9 Engineering Dr 1, 11757 Singapore
!n"vuong, mpeangh#$nus%e"u%sg
Abstract: In this paper, a systematic procedure for identifying the dynamics of industrial
robots is presented. Since joint friction can be highly nonlinearwith time varying
characteristics in the low speed region,a simple and yet effective scheme has been used to
identify the boundary velocity that separates this dynamic friction region from its static
region. he robot!s dynamic model is then identified in this static region, where the
nonlinnear friction model is reduced to the linear"in"parameter form. o overcome the
drawbac#s of the least s$uares estimator, which does not ta#e in any constraints, a
nonlinear optimi%ation problem is formulated to guarantee the physical feasibility of the
identified parameters. he proposed procedure has been demonstrated on the first four
lin#s of the &itsubishi 'A() manipulator, an improved dynamic model was obtained and
the the effectiveness of the proposed identification procedure is demonstrated.
*eywords: +ynamic &odeling, &odel Identification, ,riction &odels, &odel"based
-ontrol
1 Introduction
&he ro'ot(s "ynamic mo"el is re)uire" in the implementation of most a"vance"
mo"el*'ase" control schemes% &he "ynamic mo"el is crucial 'ecause it can 'e
use" to lineari+e the nonlinear system in 'oth ,oint space -1. an" tas/ space -0.%
Since the ro'ot(s "ynamic parameters are normally not availa'le for in"ustrial
manipulators, proper proce"ures shoul" 'e carrie" out to i"entify these
parameters%
1ne 2ay to i"entify the "ynamic parameters is to "ismantle the ro'ot an" measure
lin/ 'y lin/ -3.% 4o2ever, it is o'vious that this approach is not al2ays feasi'le in
practice% 5nother pro'lem 2ith the "ismantling approach is that it "oes not
account for the effects of ,oint friction%
N. D. Voung et al. Dynamic Model Identification for Industrial Robots
52
6n or"er to account for ,oint frictions, several metho"s 2ere propose"% &hese
metho"s can 'e roughly "ivi"e" into t2o groups7 to i"entify ,oint friction an" rigi"
'o"y "ynamics separately -8. or to i"entify ,oint friction an" rigi" 'o"y "ynamics
simultaneously -5*7.%&he former first i"entifies the friction parameters for each
,oint an" then continues to i"entify the rigi" 'o"y "ynamic parameters using the
i"entifie" friction parameters% Since friction parameters are i"entifie" ,oint 'y
,oint, nonlinear "ynamic friction mo"els such as Stri'ec/ an"9or hysteresis effects
can 'e consi"ere" -:.%&he main "ra2'ac/ of this metho" comes from the fact that
friction can 'e much time*varying -7.% Moreover, friction forces9tor)ues are
al2ays couple" to the inertial forces9tor)ues, thus, one cannot 'e precisely
i"entifie" 2ithout the other% 6t is also argue" that it is more te"ious to i"entify
friction parameters an" rigi" 'o"y "ynamic parameters separately%
From the literature, more researchers a"opt the latter metho", i%e% to i"entify ,oint
frictions an" the rigi" 'o"y "ynamics at the same time -5*7.% 6t is 2orth noting that
the ro'ot(s "ynamic mo"el ;e<clu"e" ,oint frictions= can 'e lineari+e" 2%r%t to its
parameters% &hus, many propose" i"entification metho"s 2as accomplishe" 'ase"
on the assumption that ,oint frictions can 'e mo"ele" in a linear*in*parameter
form% 4o2ever, this linearity is not vali" for velocities% 5t slo2 velocities, the
friction parameters e<hi'it some "ynamics, an" 2e refer to this region as the
>"ynamic? region of friction% @hen velocities e<cee" a threshol" velocity, the
friction parameters 'ecome >static? an" the friction is no2 linear in the parameter
form% @e therefore refer to this region as the >static or linear? regiion% &he use of
the linear friction mo"el outsi"e this linear region can lea" to significant errors on
the i"entifie" parameters as "emonstrate" in -9.% 6n this paper, a simple an"
effective scheme 2hich has 'een intro"uce" in our previous 2or/ -9. 2ill 'e use"
to i"entify the threhshol" velocity that separates the ,oint friction into "yanimic
;an" nonlinear= an" static ;an" linear in parameter= regions regions% &he ro'ot
"ynamic mo"el is then i"entitie" only in the linear region, thus more accurate
"ynamic parameters are o'taine"%
Since the ro'ot(s "ynamic mo"el is linear 2%r%t its parameters, these "ynamic
parameters can 'e i"entifie" using the 2ell*/no2n least*s)uares estimator% Note
that not all ten inertial parameters of each ro'ot(s lin/ can 'e i"entifie" "ue to the
raltive configuration of the lin/s of the ro'ot% 6t is therefore necessary to
re"uce9simplify the ro'ot mo"el to ensure that the o'servation matri< of the leasts)uare
estimator has full ran/ -1A.% &his pro'lem can 'e solve" either
sym'olically -1A. or numerically -11.%
Since the measure" tor)ues are normally noisier than the measure" position, a
proper tra,ectory shoul" 'e "esigne" to ensure the ro'ustness of the i"entifie"
results -10.% &o guarantee the ro'ustness of the estimation process, several
criterions have 'een propose" in the literature such as ma<imi+ing the "eterminant
or minimi+ing the con"ition num'er of the o'servation matri< -.% Note that all the
a'ove criteria result in solving a nonlinear constraine" optimi+ation pro'lem% &he
results from this optimi+ation pro'lem are the so*calle" e<citing9optimal tra,ectorythat can guarantee the
e<citation of all the parameters to 'e i"entifie"% Because of
the comple<ity of the "ynamic mo"el, genetic algorithm ;C5= is use" in this paper
to fin" out the a'ove optimal tra,ectory%
6t is 2orth pointing out that the a'ove e<citing tra,ectory can only account for the
uncertainties of the measure" tor)ue% 6n practice, uncertainties can also occur in
the motion "ata ;i%e% ,oint position, velocity an" acceleration=% Moreover, "ue to
the fact that most in"ustrial manipulators "o not come 2ith velocity an"
acceleration sensor, thus, these information are normally o'taine" through
numerical "ifferentiation of the ,oint position measurements% 5s a result, the
)uality of the o'servation matri< of the least s)uare estimator can 'e significantly
"egra"e"% 5 "irect conse)uence of this o'servation is that the results from the
least s)uare estimator can "eviate" from its true value% Since no constraints are
impose" on the least*s)uares techni)ue, it is possi'le for the least*s)uares
estimator to pro"uce results 2hich are physically impossi'le -13*18.% 5lthough
there are other metho"s to cope 2ith uncertainties on the o'servation matri< such
as the ma<imum li/elihoo" metho" -15., most of them "o not consi"er the
physical feasi'ilty of the i"entifie" parameters as an important criteria% Noting that
a physically non*feasi'le "ynamic mo"el cannot 'e use" in mo"el*'ase" control
'ecause this mo"el can result in a non*possitive "efinite inertial matri<, thus,
"esta'ili+e the close" loop control system% 1ne promising solution for this
pro'lem is to use constraine" optimi+ation tools to a",ust the least*s)uares result
-1.% 4o2ever, this metho" re)uires the initial guess of the virtual parameters
2hich are not al2ays availa'le in practice%
5lthough there is a vast amount of results on the "ynamic i"entification topics in
the literature, a systematic proce"ure 2hich inclu"es all the a'ove consi"erations
is still missing% &hus, the aim of this paper is to present a systemantic proce"ure
for i"entifying the ro'ot(s "ynamic mo"el% &his "ynamic mo"el can then 'e use"
in a"vance" mo"el*'ase" controllers%
2 Rigid ody Modeling and Identification
2.1 Rigid ody Modeling
6t is 2ell /no2n that the "ynamic mo"el of an n*"egree*of*free"om ;n*D1F= serial
manipulator can 'e e<presse" in the follo2ing analytical form7
&;$=$DD+-;$D,$= +.;$= + fric = ;1=
2here7
N. D. Voung et al. Dynamic Model Identification for Industrial Robots
54
* $DD,$D, $ are n 'y 1 vectors of ,oint acceleration, velocity an" position,
respectively%
* &;$=,-;$D, $=,.;$= are the inertial matri<, Eoriolis*Eentrifugal an" gravity
vector in ,oint space%
* fric is an n 'y 1 vector of ,oint friction an" is a n 'y 1 vector of force9tor)ue
at each ,oint%
For i"entification purpose, the a'ove e)uation is re*2ritten in the linear form7
; , , , = fric / $DD $D $ +0 h + = ;0=
4ere, D4 is the /inematic parameters from the Denavit*4arten'erg parameters
an" h is a 1An < 1 vector of the inertial parameters7
[ , , , , , , , , , ]
i i i i i i i i i i i h = 11 12 13 22 23 33 m1 m2 m3 m ;3=
[ ] 1 %%%
n h = h h ;8=
2here ( , , , , , ) i i i i i i 11 12 13 22 23 33 are the inertial tensor of lin/ i,
( , , , ) i i i i m1 m2 m3 m are the first moments an" the lin/ mass% Noting that, here, 2e
only focus on the inertial parameters of the lin/s% &he rotor inertias of motors are
assume" to 'e /no2n 'ecause these values are normally availa'le from the motor
specs% From ;0=, it is clear that if ,oint friction mo"el are linear 2%r%t its
parameters, the pro'lem of i"entifying the "ynamic mo"el is a linear pro'lem% 6n
the ne<t section, con"ition for 2hich the linear*in*parameter friction mo"el is
vali" 2ill 'e "erive"%
2.2 Nonlinear !riction Model and oundary Velocity
5lthough ,oint frictions is complicate" in reality, simple mo"el, 2hich is the
com'ination of viscous an" Eoulom' friction, is normally use" to "escri'e the
friction phenomenon for all ,oint;s=7
F ; = fric i ci i vi i = , sign $D + , $D ;5=
2here 2here ci , an" vi , are Eoulom' an" viscous friction coefficients of ,oint i
respectively% 4o2ever, this assumption can lea" to a significant "egra"ation of the
accuracy of the i"entifie" parameters% 1ne solution for this pro'lem is to ma/e use
of the 'oun"ary velocity 2here the nonlinear an" linear friction are separate" as
"iscusse" in -9.% By analy+ing the velocity*tor)ue map, one shoul" 'e a'le to
i"entify the 'oun"ary velocity for each ,oint%
&he follo2ing part 'riefly "escri'es the step*'y*step proce"ures for o'taining
* Step 17 re*mount the manipulator in such a 2ay that the gravity has no
effect on the ,oint of interest% 5pply a sinusoi"al tor)ue to the ,oint%
Notice that the fre)uency an" magnitu"e of this signal have to 'e chosen
in such a 2ay that the result ,oint motion is 2ithin the ,oint limit an" the
motion also e<cites the "ynamic friction% During this step, 17 ; , , , =i 4 $ $ $ = D DD
is recor"e" ; 4 is the num'er of recor"e" points=% Since only one ,oint is
e<cite" at the time, the e)uation of motion of the system is7
I$DD+ ,- sign;$D= + ,5 $D = ;=
2here , , - 5 I , , are the lumpe" inertia, Eoulum' an" viscous friction
coefficients of the ,oint of interest% 6f ;= can "escri'e the friction mo"el
at ,oints, , , - 5 I , , can 'e resolve" from the follo2ing linear system7
1 1 1 1 ; =
%%% %%% %%% %%%
; =
-
& & & 5 &
$ sign$ $ I
,
$ sign$ $ ,


=

DD D D
DD D D
;7=
2here & 4 is the num'er of "ata points 2hich are use" for the
i"entification%
* Step 07 slo2ly increasing thres $D from A to ma<; = i $D % Solve ;7= for the
parameters of the "ynamic mo"el using only the "ata points for 2hich
i thres $D > $D % &he parameters of the "ynamic mo"el shoul" 'e constant% By
analy+ing the convergence of the inertial parameter G I , one can
e<perimentally fin" out the region in 2hich the linear friction mo"el is
hel"% Base" on this result, 2e can actually reconstruct the ,oint velocity
vs% friction tor)ue plot ;or friction map=% For instance, Figure 1a sho2s
the convergence of G I 2%r%t thres $D , Figure 1' sho2s the friction map of the
first ,oint of the H51A manipulator%
Figure 1
;a= thres $D vs% G I , ;'= $D vs% friction of the first ,oint of the H51A manipulator
1%7
1%:
1%9
0%A
0%1
A A%A5 A%1 A%15 A%0 A%05 A%3 t h r e s $D A %0 %8 % %:
A
5
1A
15
5
1A
15
$D ;rad 9 s=
N. D. Voung et al. Dynamic Model Identification for Industrial Robots
56
* Step 37 &he e<periment is then repeate" for the rest of the ,oints% &he
resulting thres $D 2ill 'e use" as constraints in "esigning the e<citing
tra,ectory ;as presente" in the ne<t section=%
6n summary, if ,oint velocity is outsi"e the range ( , ) thres thres $D $D , ,oint friction can
'e mo"ele" as a com'ination of Eoulom' an" viscous friction ;E)% 5=% By
incorporating ;0= an" ;5=, the ro'ot "ynamic mo"el can 'e re2ritten as7
; , , , =c c / $DD $D $ +0 h = ;:=
2here , c c / h are the com'inations of inertial parameters an" friction coefficients7
1,7 1 1
1
1
,7
; = %%% A A
%%% %%% %%% %%% %%% %%% ,
A A %%% ; =
%%%
c
c c
v
n n n
h
/ sign$ $
,
/ h
,
/ sign $ $


= =


D D
D D
;9=
6t is 2orth noting that e)uation ;9= in"icates that in or"er to re*solve for c h ,
c / matri< has to 'e full ran/% 6t is 2ell*/no2n that not all the inertial parameters
contri'ute to the "ynamic 'ehaviour of the ro'ot -1, 1A, 17.I thus, a set of
i"entifia'le parameters ;the so*calle" base parameters -1A.= shoul" 'e "e"uce"
from h % For instance, the original "ynamic parameters of the 7*D1F Mitsu'ishi
H51A manipulator h has 7A parameters 'ut the final i"entifie" "ynamics of the
manipulator is re"uce" into 1: lumpe"*parameters -18.% &he final form of the
"ynamic mo"el 'ecomes7
b b / h = ;1A=
2here b h is comprise" of the 'ase parameters an" linear friction mo"el%
&heoretically, 'y resolving ;1A=, one can accurately estimate the inertial
parameters b h provi"e" that the o'servation matri< b / an" the ,oint tor)ue can
'e accurately o'taine"% 6n practice, these assumptions are al2ays violate"% 5s a
result, the i"entification e<periment shoul" 'e "esigne" in such a 2ay that the
results from the least*s)uare estimator are ro'ust 2%r%t to the noise% &his
o'servation lea"s to the "iscussion in the ne<t section7 the "esign of the e<citing
tra,ectory%
2." #$citing %ra&ectory
6n or"er to estimate b h from ;1A=, { ; , , = , } b b i / $DD $D $ nee" to 'e ac)uire" through the
i"entification e<periment% By stac/ing the matri< together, the o'servation matri<
can 'e forme" as follo2s7
Acta olytec!nica "ungarica Vol. 6# No. 5# 2$$%
5&
1 1
%%% , %%%
b b
o o
b4 b4
/
/
/

= =

;11=
&heoretically, as long as the "eterminant of the o'servation matri< o / , 2hich
"epen"s on the e<citing tra,ectory 2hich has 'een use" in the i"entification
e<periment, is non*+ero, the un/no2n parameters b h can 'e estimate" 'y the 2ell/no2n
least*s)uares92eighte" least*s)uare estimator7
( )G 1
b o o o o h / / / = ;10a=
4o2ever, if the measure" tor)ues are corrupte" 'y noise, a constraint shoul" 'e
impose" on the e<periment tra,ectory to ensure the ro'ustness of the i"entifie"
results% Hhysically, fin"ing this constraint is e)uivalent to fin"ing an optimal
tra,ectory that can e<cite most the i"entifie" parameters% Several criteria have 'een
propose" in literature -1:.% 6n this paper, minimi+ing the con"ition num'er an"
ma<imi+ing the smallest singular value of the o'servation matri< o / as in -. is
a"opte"% Moreover, if the information on the noise is availa'le, 2eighte" leasts)uare
can 'e use"7
( )G 1
b o o o o h / 6/ / 6 = ;10'=
2here 6 is the inverse of the covariance noise matri< -19.%
Notice that, 'ecause 2e 2ant to minimi+e the effect of the non*linear friction on
the i"entifie" result;s=, only the "ata points 2hich have velocities a'ove a
threshol"9'oun"ary value ;from the previous section= are consi"ere"% &his "iffers
from other researchers 2hich normally ta/e into account all "ata points along the
optimum tra,ectory% Since the optimum tra,ectory 2ill 'e e<ecute" on the
manipulator, parameteri+ing the optimum tra,ectory is also an important step% &2o
most common type;s= are the )uintic polynomial tra,ectory -. an" perio"ic
tra,ectory -0A.% &he former is suita'le for most of in"ustrial manipulator;s= 2hich
only accepts simple velocity comman" 2hile the later targets the open*architecture
controller 2hich allo2s user to program an ar'itrary tra,ectory% 6n this paper,
perio"ic tra,ectory, 2hich can 'e parameteri+e" as a sum of finite Fourier series
;13=, is a"opte" 'ecause of their a"vantages in terms of signal processing -01.7
A
1
; = sin; = cos; =
4
i i il f il f
l
$ t $ a w lt b w lt
=
= + ;13a=
1
; = cos; = sin; =
4
i il f f il f f
l
$ t a w l w lt b w l w lt
=
D = + ;13'=
N. D. Voung et al. Dynamic Model Identification for Industrial Robots
5'
( ) ( ) 0 0
1
; = sin; = cos; =
4
i il f f il f f
l
$ t a w l w lt b w l w lt
=
DD = + ;13c=
2here f w is the fun"amental fre)uency of the e<citation tra,ectories an" shoul"
'e carefully chosen not to e<cite the un*mo"ele" "ynamics of the manipulator%
&he pro'lem of fin"ing the optimal tra,ectory 'ecomes "etermining the
coefficients A ; , i , i =
i # # $ a b in or"er to minimi+e the follo2ing cost function7
1 0
A
; ; == ; = 1
; = i c
c
f $ t cond /
/

= + ;18=
2here the scalar 1
an" 0
represent the relative 2eights 'et2een the con"ition
num'er of the o'servation matri<7 ; = c cond / an" its minimum singular value7
A; = c / -.% Note that the a'ove pro'lem is a constraine" optimi+ation pro'lem
'ecause physical limits of ,oint position, velocity an" acceleration have to 'e
consi"ere"% 5s can 'e seen from ;9= an" ;1A=, the cost function is nonlinear an"
"iscontinuous e%g% the sign function in ;9=% &his can ma/e the optimi+ation process
'ecome significantly "ifficult% 6n practice, one can avoi" the "iscontinuity 'y
replacing the ; = i sign $D function in ;9= 2ith an appro<imate" continuous function
such as ; =i atan c$D % &he e<tra coefficient c is use" to a",ust the steepness of the
slope 2hen $D approaches +ero% Due to the comple<ity of the pro'lem, a goo"
initial guess for this optimi+ation is har" to achieve% &hus, a genetic algorithm
;C5= is use" to solve the a'ove optimi+ation pro'lem%
1nce the optimi+ation has 'een solve", the optimum tra,ectories ; = i $ t for all ,oints
are o'taine"% &he manipulator 2ill 'e comman"e" to follo2 this optimal tra,ectory
'y any availa'le controller% For instance, an in"epen"ent ,oint control scheme
2hich inclu"es a high*gain H6D controller at each ,oint 2as use" in our
e<periment% &he responses of the ro'ot along the tra,ectories 2ill 'e recor"e"% 6t is
2orth noting that the collecte" "ata shoul" 'e pre*processe" as suggeste" in -0A.
in or"er to improve the "ata )uality 'efore using them to estimate the "ynamic
parameter% 5 'rief "escription is as follo2s7
* Firstly, the ,oint position "ata can 'e filtere" 'y a lo2*pass filter 2ith an
appropriate cut*off fre)uency 2hich "epen"s on the choice of the
fun"amental fre)uency f w in ;13=% &his is reasona'le 'ecause the
fre)uency components in the optimal tra,ectory from previous section are
alrea"y pre"efine" in the "esign state%
* 6f ,oint velocity an" acceleration are not availa'le "ue to the lac/ of ,oint
sensors, this information can 'e o'taine" through a numerical
"ifferentiation% 4o2ever, since the e<citing tra,ectory are "esigne" in the
form of ;13=, a linear least s)uare fit ;15= can 'e performe" to estimate
Acta olytec!nica "ungarica Vol. 6# No. 5# 2$$%
5%
the coefficients A ; , , = i il il $ a b of the actual optimal tra,ectory ;i%e% the actual
motion of the ro'ot= as suggeste" in -15.7
A