Soal Holonomic

Nonholonomic Constraints
Examples
Basilio Bona
DAUIN – Politecnico di Torino
July 2009
B. Bona (DAUIN) Examples July 2009 1 / 34

Example 1
T
Given qT = x y check that the constraint
dx dy
φ(q) = (2x + sin y − ye −x ) + (x cos y + cos y + e −x ) =0
dt dt
is holonomic.
We have, by inspection
a1 (q) = 2x + sin y − ye −x a2 (q) = x cos y + cos y + e −x

We have to test the following conditions
∂a1 (q) ∂a1 (q) ? ∂a2 (q) ∂a2 (q)

≡ = ≡
∂y ∂q2 ∂q1 ∂x
but since
∂a1 (q)
= cos y − e −x
∂y
∂a2 (q)
= cos y − e −x
∂x
the two terms are equal, and the constraint is holonomic
Z
φ(q) = x 2 + x sin x + ye −x + sin y = c
i.e.,
x 2 + x sin x + ye −x + sin y − c = 0

Example 2
T
Given qT = x y θ , check that the constraint
ẋ sin θ − ẏ cos θ = 0
 
dx
sin θ − cos θ 0 dy  = 0
dθ
is nonholonomic.
Computing the mixed partial derivative we obtain
∂a1 (q) ∂a1 (q)

=0 = cos θ
∂y ∂θ
∂a2 (q) ∂a2 (q)
=0 = − sin θ
∂x ∂θ
∂a3 (q) ∂a3 (q)
=0 =0
∂x ∂y

Hence the constraint is nonholonomic, since
∂a1 (q) ∂a2 (q)
=
∂y ∂x
∂a1 (q) ∂a3 (q)
6=
∂θ ∂x
∂a2 (q) ∂a3 (q)
6=
∂θ ∂y
Using the integrating factor approach, we have to compute the terms in

∂µa1 ∂µ ∂µa2 ∂µ
= sin q3 = − cos q3
∂q2 ∂q2 ∂q1 ∂q1
∂µa1 ∂µ ∂µa3
= sin q3 + µ cos q3 = 0
∂q3 ∂q3 ∂q1
∂µa2 ∂µ ∂µa3
= − cos q3 µ sin q3 = 0
∂q3 ∂q3 ∂q2

and write the system:
∂µ ∂µ
sin q3 = − cos q3
∂q2 ∂q1
∂µ
sin q3 = −µ cos q3
∂q3
∂µ
cos q3 = µ sin q3
∂q3
∂µ
Squaring and adding the two last equations yields = ±µ; substitution
∂θ
in the system above gives
µ cos θ = µ sin θ
µ sin θ = −µ cos θ
Since the only possible solution is µ = 0, the constraints are nonholonomic.

Example 3
Figure: Example of nonholonomic constrained system: a disk rotating on a plane

without sliding.

The previous Figure represents a rigid wheel, with radius ρ and negligible
thickness, rolling on a plane πc with a single contact point Oc (t), that
changes in time according to the wheel motion.
The plane πr of the wheel is orthogonal to the axis of the wheel, described
by the unit vector jr . This plane forms an angle α(t) wrt the normal of the
plane πc , that, for simplicity is horizontal.
The plane πr forms an angle β(t) wrt to a conventional direction on πc ,
e.g., the direction of the unit vector i0 of the fixed reference frame
R0 (i0 , j0 , k0 ). This angle may vary with time.
The motion constraint implies in the first place that the contact point Oc
must in any circumstance belong to πc (no jumps allowed).

In the second place, the non sliding motion implies two condition:
(Transversal sliding) the impossibility for the wheel to move
transversally; the wheel velocity has no components along the unit
vector jc on πc .
(Longitudinal sliding) the wheel displacement d(t) on the plane along
ic must always be equal to the length ρθ(t) of the arc under θ. If not
so, a sliding or slipping condition arise: the wheel moves, but does
not rotate, or the wheel rotates but does not move.
These conditions imply that the instantaneous velocity of Oc or Or must
be aligned with the unit vector i′ , by construction itself aligned with ic .
Rotation around kr are allowed, since the rotation takes place around an
ideal geometric point Oc , that do not imply a sliding effect.

In conclusion, the wheel translates along a local direction given by i′ = ic
and rotates around the instantaneous rotation axis kr = k′
The homogeneous matrix T0r between the fixed reference frame R0 and
the local reference frame Rr is
from R0 to Rc : T0c = Trasl(dc (t)) Rot(−k, β(t)), where
T
dc = xc yc 0 represents Oc in R0 :
from Rc to Rr : Tcr = Rot(i, α(t)) Trasl(ρ) Rot(j, θ(t)), where
T
ρ= 0 0 ρ
Without constraints, the generalized coordinates describing the system are
the three components of dc (t) and the three angles α(t), β(t), e θ(t):

qT = xc yc zc α β θ

It seems convincing that the planar motion reduces the dof from six to
five, considering the additional constraint
dc · k0 = 0; → q3 (t) = 0, ∀t
Therefore the new generalized coordinates are

qTc = xc yc α β θ
The non sliding/slipping condition generates a relation between the

contact point velocity and the wheel velocity; when we represent all the
vectors in a common frame R0 , we have:
ḋc (t) = ρθ̇(t)ic

Using the quantities in Figure, we write
   
cβ d xc 
ρθ̇(t) −sβ  − yc = 0
0 dt 0
or
dxc = ρθ̇(t)cβ dt
dyc = −ρθ̇(t)sβ dt
hence
dxc 1
=−
dyc tan β

Replacing the infinitesimal displacements with the virtual ones, we have
tan β δxc + δyc = 0 or sin β δxc + cos β δyc = 0 (1)
i.e.,  
δq1
δq 
 2

sin q4 cos q4 0 0 0 δq3  = 0
δq 
4
δq5
This represent a constraint in Pfaffian form with
a1 = sin β, a2 = cos β, a3 = a4 = a5 = 0. Computing the partial derivatives
we have
∂a1 (q) ∂a4 (q) ∂a2 (q) ∂a4 (q)
= cos q4 ; = 0; = − sin q4 ; =0
∂q4 ∂q1 ∂q4 ∂q2

It appears immediately that equality relations among partial derivatives are
not satisfied, so the constrain is non holonomic.
We could ask how many degrees of freedom has the system; relation (1)
introduces a constraint that links the virtual displacement δxc to δyc .
Recalling the dof’s definition as the number of virtual displacements
independent and complete, the system has only four of such
displacements, i.e., δxc , δα, δβ e δθ, while δyc is connected to δxc by (1)
and δzc = 0 due to the plane motion.
The accessibility space however has dimension 5, since, it is possible, with
a suitable motion, to bring the state from any initial point q0 ∈ R5 to any
final point qf ∈ R5 .

Example: the unicycle
The unicycle is illustrated in Figure 2.
Figure: The unicycle scheme.

The unicycle generalized coordinates are
T T
q = q1 q2 q3 = x y θ
As seen in a previous example, the non sliding motion on the plane
determines the following single (m = 1) constraint
 
q1
ẋsθ − ẏ cθ = sθ −cθ 0 q2  = Aq = 0
| {z } q3
A
Now we compute the vector fields forming a basis of the null space of A;
the null space has dimension n − m = 2; moreover, since the null space
conditions are expressed by the following equation
 
g11 g21
sθ −cθ 0 g12 g22  = sθ −cθ 0 g1 g2
g13 g23
we obtain    
cθ 0
g 1 =  sθ  ; g2 = 0
0 1
Hence the kinematic model of the unicycle becomes
     
ẋ cθ 0
ẏ  = Gu = sθ  u1 + 0 u2
θ̇ 0 1
Physical considerations allows to define the following inputs: u1 = v ,

where v is the driving velocity of the unicycle, obtained as the product of
the wheel radius ρ and the wheel angular speed α̇, and u2 = ω, where
ω = θ̇ is the steering velocity around the vertical axis.

The Lie bracket of the two input vector fields is
     
∂g2 ∂g1 0 0 0 0 0 −sθ sθ
[g1 , g2 ] = g − g = 0 0 0 g1 − 0 0 cθ  g2 = −cθ 
∂q 1 ∂q 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
We can see that [g1 , g2 ] ≡ g3 is linearly independent from g1 and g2 . We

can also compute the next term [g1 , [g1 , g2 ]] as
       
∂g3 ∂g 0 0 cθ 0 0 0 −s θ sθ cθ
[g1 , g3 ] = g1 − 1 g3 = 0 0 sθ  0−0 0 cθ  cθ  =  sθ 
∂q ∂q 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
that is no more independent from the previous fields.

If we consider the iterative procedure ∆1 , ∆2 , · · · , ∆κ = ∆κ+1 to obtain
the involutive closure, i.e, the accessibility distribution ∆A , and recall that
κ is called the degree of nonholonomy, we have
∆1 = ∆ = span {g1 , g2 }
∆2 = span {g1 , g2 , [g1 , g2 ]}
∆3 = span {g1 , g2 , [g1 , g2 ], [g1 , [g1 , g2 ]]} = ∆2
Hence ∆2 = ∆3 , the accessibility distribution ∆A is
∆A = ∆2 = span {g1 , g2 , [g1 , g2 ]}
with dim ∆A = 3 and κ = 2.

Chained form: the unicycle
Recalling the kinematic model of the unicycle
     
ẋ cθ 0
ẏ  = Gu =  sθ  v + 0 ω
θ̇ 0 1
with the following coordinates change
z1 = θ; z2 = xcθ + y sθ ; z3 = xsθ − y cθ
and the following input change
v ≡ u1 = v2 + z3 v1
ω ≡ u2 = v1
we obtain the chained form
ż1 = v1
ż2 = v2
ż3 = z2 v1
Notice that the new coordinates z2 , z3 give the position of the unicycle in
a reference frame that rotates with the robot body.
Example: the bicycle
The bicycle is illustrated in Figure 3, where C is the instantaneous rotation
center, θ the body orientation, φ the steering wheel angle, and x, y the
cartesian coordinates of the rear (passive) wheel contact point.
Figure: The bicycle scheme.

Possible bicycle generalized coordinates are
T T
q = q1 q2 q3 q4 = x y θ φ
The vehicle motion is constrained by the two non-sliding constraints at the

contact points of the posterior and anterior wheels:
ẋa s34 − ẏa c34 = 0

ẋs3 − ẏc3 = 0
where xa , ya are the cartesian coordinates of the anterior wheel, s3 = sin θ,

c3 = cos θ s34 = sin(θ + φ), and c34 = cos(θ + φ). The bicycle body fix
the relation between the position of the two wheels
xa = x + ℓc3 ẋa = ẋ − ℓs3

ya = y + ℓs3 ẏa = ẏ + ℓc3

The constrains can be rewritten as
ẋs34 − ẏ c34 − ℓθ̇c4 = 0

ẋs3 − ẏ c3 = 0
The associated A(q) matrix is

s3 −c3 0 0
A(q) =
s34 −c34 −ℓc4 0
whose rank is ρ(A) = 2; the null space N (A) dimension

is ν = n − ρ = 2.
A basis of the null space can be found setting A g1 g2 = 0. Consider
   
g11 g21
g  g 
g1 =  12  g2 =  22  G = g1 g2
g13 g23
g14 g24

The condition AG = O gives the following constraints
s3 g11 − c3 g12 = 0 s3 g21 − c3 g22 = 0
s3 g11 − c3 g12 − ℓc4 g13 = 0 s3 g21 − c3 g22 − ℓc4 g23 = 0
Since we have eight unknowns, but only four equations, we apply some
T
heuristics: we set g2 = 0 0 0 1 and g14 = 0, so we reduce to two
equations in three unknowns.
We can verify that the choice
   
c3 c4 0
s c  0
g1 (q) =  3 4  g2 (q) =  
s4 /ℓ 0
0 1
satisfies the constraints, yielding to the kinematic model of the bicycle
     
ẋ c3 c4 0
ẏ   s3 c4  0
 = u + u
 θ̇  s4 /ℓ 1 0 2
φ̇ 0 1

Consider the geometric relations among the command variables, if the
bicycle is driven by the anterior wheel, we set u2 as the steering velocity ω,
while u1 is the anterior driving velocity v . In this case
     
ẋ c3 c4 0
ẏ  s3 c4  0
 =  v +  ω
 θ̇  s4 /ℓ 0
φ̇ 0 1
If, on the contrary, the driving velocity v ′ is applied by the rear wheel, we
have the geometric relation u1 c4 = v ′ , and consequently
           
ẋ c3 c4 0 ẋ c3 0
ẏ  s3 c4   0 ẏ   s3  ′ 0
 = u + ω⇒  θ̇  = s4 /c4 ℓ v + 0 ω

 θ̇  s4 /ℓ 1 0
φ̇ 0 1 φ̇ 0 1

Chained form: the bicycle
Assume the rear wheel drive bicycle model

     
ẋ c3 0
ẏ   s3  ′ 0
  =  v +  ω
 θ̇  t4 ℓ 0
φ̇ 0 1
where t4 = tan q4 . Introducing the following coordinates change

1
z1 = x; z2 = sec3 θ tan φ; z3 = tan φ; z4 = y
ℓ

and the following input transformation
v1
v=
cos θ
3 1
ω = − v1 sec θ sin2 φ + v2 cos3 θ cos2 φ
ℓ ℓ
we obtain the chained form
ż1 = v1
ż2 = v2
ż3 = z 2 v1
ż4 = z 3 v1

Example: a planar space robot
The planar satellite in Figure 4 consists of a free-flying main body, with two
rotating arms; for simplicity their mass is concentrated at end of the arm.
B. Bona (DAUIN) Figure: The planar satellite scheme.

Examples July 2009 28 / 34
Consider the following generalized coordinates: x, y the position of
center-of-mass (com), θ its orientation wrt a fixed frame, φ1 , φ2 the
orientation of the two arms wrt to the body frame.
Hence T
q= x y φ1 φ2 θ
Other parameters are: r the distance of the arm revolute joints from com
and ℓ the length of the two arms; M is the main body mass, Γ its inertia
moment wrt to the com, and m are the equal masses of the two arms.
With the usual angle convention (positive if anti-clockwise), the two
masses have coordinates
x1 = x + r cos θ + ℓ cos(θ + φ1 ); y1 = y + r sin θ + ℓ sin(θ + φ1 )
x2 = x − r cos θ − ℓ cos(θ + φ1 ); y2 = y − r sin θ − ℓ sin(θ + φ1 )

The Lagrangian function, assuming no gravity, is simply the kinetic energy
1
T = [M(ẋ 2 + ẏ 2 ) + Γ θ̇ 2 + m(ẋ12 + ẏ12 ) + m(ẋ22 + ẏ22 )]
2
but it can also be written in simplified form as
 
φ̇1
1 1
T = (M + 2m) kẋk2 + φ̇1 φ̇2 θ̇ M φ̇2  ; M ∈ R3×3
2 2
θ̇
where ẋ is the com velocity vector and M is diagonal, with the following
elements mij :
m11 = mℓ2 m12 = 0 m13 = mℓ2 + mr cos φ1

m22 = mℓ m23 = mℓ2 + mr cos φ2
2
m33 = Γ + 2m(r 2 + ℓ2 ) + 2mℓr (cos φ1 + cos φ2 )
We notice that L does not depend on θ, and we can reduce the

T
generalized coordinates to the following q = φ1 φ2 θ .
If the satellite is free-floating and no other generalized force/torque is
applied, and assuming that the satellite com remains in (0, 0) for t ≥ t0 ,
then T reduces to
 
φ̇1
1
T = φ̇ φ̇2 θ̇ M φ̇2  ; M ∈ R3×3

2 1
θ̇
and the Lagrange equations reduce to

d ∂L ∂L
− =0
∂θ
dt ∂ θ̇ |{z}
=0
∂L
since we know (from Hamilton equations) that is the angular
∂ θ̇
momentum p

We have
∂L
p= = m13 φ̇1 + m23 φ̇2 + m33 θ̇
∂ θ̇
If the initial angular momentum is zero, we have the constraint
m13 (q)q̇1 + m23 (q)q̇2 + m33 (q)q̇3 = 0
Since the actuated coordinates are u1 = φ̇1 and u2 = φ̇2 , we have
q̇ = g1 (q)u1 + g2 (q)u2
with    1   
q̇1 0
q̇2  =  0   1 
 m13  u1 +  m23  u2
q̇3 − −
m33 m33

It is sufficient to compute
∂m13 ∂m23
=0 =0
∂q2 ∂q1
∂m13 ∂m33
=0 = −2mℓr sin q1
∂q3 ∂q1
∂m23 ∂m33
=0 = −2mℓr sin q2
∂q3 ∂q2
to verify that the constraints are nonholonomic.

References
[01] F. Bullo, A.D. Lewis, Geometric Control of Mechanical Systems,

Springer, 2005.
[02] H.K. Khalil, Nonlinear Systems, III Ed. Springer, 2002.
[03] R.M. Murray, Z. Li, S. Sastry, A Mathematical Introduction to
Robotic Manipulation, CRC Press, 1994.
[04] S. Sastry, Nonlinear Systems: Analysis, Stability, and Control,
Springer, 1999.
[05] B. Siciliano, L. Sciavicco, L. Villani, G. Oriolo, Robotics: Modelling,
Planning and Control, Springer, 2009.
[06] Z. Qu, Cooperative Control of Dynamical Systems: Applications to
Autonomous Vehicles, Springer, 2009.

Soal Holonomic

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Soal Holonomic

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Nonholonomic Constraints

DAUIN – Politecnico di Torino

B. Bona (DAUIN) Examples July 2009 1 / 34

a1 (q) = 2x + sin y − ye −x a2 (q) = x cos y + cos y + e −x

B. Bona (DAUIN) Examples July 2009 2 / 34

∂a1 (q) ∂a1 (q) ? ∂a2 (q) ∂a2 (q)

B. Bona (DAUIN) Examples July 2009 3 / 34

∂a1 (q) ∂a1 (q)

B. Bona (DAUIN) Examples July 2009 4 / 34

Using the integrating factor approach, we have to compute the terms in

B. Bona (DAUIN) Examples July 2009 5 / 34

Since the only possible solution is µ = 0, the constraints are nonholonomic.

B. Bona (DAUIN) Examples July 2009 6 / 34

Figure: Example of nonholonomic constrained system: a disk rotating on a plane

B. Bona (DAUIN) Examples July 2009 7 / 34

B. Bona (DAUIN) Examples July 2009 8 / 34

B. Bona (DAUIN) Examples July 2009 9 / 34

B. Bona (DAUIN) Examples July 2009 10 / 34

Therefore the new generalized coordinates are

The non sliding/slipping condition generates a relation between the

ḋc (t) = ρθ̇(t)ic

B. Bona (DAUIN) Examples July 2009 11 / 34

B. Bona (DAUIN) Examples July 2009 12 / 34

tan β δxc + δyc = 0 or sin β δxc + cos β δyc = 0 (1)

B. Bona (DAUIN) Examples July 2009 13 / 34

B. Bona (DAUIN) Examples July 2009 14 / 34

Figure: The unicycle scheme.

B. Bona (DAUIN) Examples July 2009 15 / 34

Physical considerations allows to define the following inputs: u1 = v ,

B. Bona (DAUIN) Examples July 2009 17 / 34

We can see that [g1 , g2 ] ≡ g3 is linearly independent from g1 and g2 . We

that is no more independent from the previous fields.

B. Bona (DAUIN) Examples July 2009 18 / 34

Hence ∆2 = ∆3 , the accessibility distribution ∆A is

∆A = ∆2 = span {g1 , g2 , [g1 , g2 ]}

with dim ∆A = 3 and κ = 2.

B. Bona (DAUIN) Examples July 2009 19 / 34

Figure: The bicycle scheme.

The vehicle motion is constrained by the two non-sliding constraints at the

ẋa s34 − ẏa c34 = 0

where xa , ya are the cartesian coordinates of the anterior wheel, s3 = sin θ,

xa = x + ℓc3 ẋa = ẋ − ℓs3

B. Bona (DAUIN) Examples July 2009 22 / 34

ẋs34 − ẏ c34 − ℓθ̇c4 = 0

The associated A(q) matrix is

whose rank is ρ(A) = 2; the null space N (A) dimension

B. Bona (DAUIN) Examples July 2009 23 / 34

B. Bona (DAUIN) Examples July 2009 24 / 34

B. Bona (DAUIN) Examples July 2009 25 / 34

Assume the rear wheel drive bicycle model

where t4 = tan q4 . Introducing the following coordinates change

B. Bona (DAUIN) Examples July 2009 26 / 34

B. Bona (DAUIN) Examples July 2009 27 / 34

B. Bona (DAUIN) Figure: The planar satellite scheme.

B. Bona (DAUIN) Examples July 2009 29 / 34

m11 = mℓ2 m12 = 0 m13 = mℓ2 + mr cos φ1

m33 = Γ + 2m(r 2 + ℓ2 ) + 2mℓr (cos φ1 + cos φ2 )

We notice that L does not depend on θ, and we can reduce the

and the Lagrange equations reduce to

B. Bona (DAUIN) Examples July 2009 31 / 34

m13 (q)q̇1 + m23 (q)q̇2 + m33 (q)q̇3 = 0

Since the actuated coordinates are u1 = φ̇1 and u2 = φ̇2 , we have

B. Bona (DAUIN) Examples July 2009 32 / 34