FPI3 14:30
An Adaptive Coordinated Control Scheme
for Multi-Manipulator Systems
Jong-Hann Jean'
Department of Electrical Engineering'
Department of Computer Sicence & Information Engineering2
National Taiwan University, Taiwan, R. 0. C.
Abstract
In this paper, the problem of adaptive coordinated control of
multiple robot arms transporting an object is addressed. A concise
dynamic model is proposed, which is amiable to controller design
and stability analysis. Based on this dynamic model, an adaptive
scheme for both trajectory tracking control and internal force con-
trol is presented. Detailed analyses on tracking properties of the
object position, velocity and the internal forces exerted on the ob-
ject are given. The paper shows that this control scheme can achieve
satisfactory tracking performance without using the measurement of
contact forces and their derivatives. In addition, some implementa-
tion issues for the scheme are discussed.
1. INTRODUCTION
There is growing interest in the development of coordinated
multi-manipulator systems. The potential applications of such sys-
tems cover a wide range, for example, grasping and manipulation
by a multi-fingered robot hand, material handling and assembly by
a multi-arm systems, and all other tasks recognized to be beyond
the capability of a single arm. In all of these applications, two or
more arms should be controlled in a coordinated fashion to han-
dle complicated and dexterous tasks skillfully. Research problems
which have been directed toward achieving such requirements in-
clude grasping stability, dynamics formulation, collision avoidance,
load distribution, trajectory tracking control, internal force control
and others.
There have been numerous researches which have proposed con-
trol strategies for coordinated multi-arm systems. Some of these
research works are based on the basic concept of master/slave
method [1]-[4]1, in which the master arms are controlled to track
a preplanned trajectory and the slave arms are servoed to follow
the master arms. Another group of research works [5]-[8J utilizes
the strategy hybrid position/force control [9] consisting of two ex-
plict control laws, namely, position control law on motions along
force constrained directions and force control law on those along
position constrained directions.
It should be noted that the success of the aforementioned
schemes relies on the full knowledge about the complex dynamics of
the multi-manipulator system. Care, therefore, should be taken in
that if there is uncertainty about the system dynamics, the controller
so designed may give degraded performance and may even incur in-
stability. This is reason why adaptive control strategies have been
proposed to handle the uncertainties in the robot dynamics.
This research was supproted by National Science Council
under the grant NSC 79-0404-E002-03
3050
and Li-Chen Fu)'2
Several adaptive control schemes [10-1 15] for robot motion con-
trol have been developed to assure the stability of the overall system
inspite of the nonlinear imprecise knowledge of the system dynam-
ics. These methods are roughly classified into two categories: one
is based on a decomposition of the robot dynamics into the product
of a nonlinear implementable function matrix and a constant vector
which consists of unknown system parameters [10]-[14J whereas the
other directly deals with a form of the robot dynamics as a function
vector [15]. In the former, estimates of those parameters are used
to synthesize the control input and are updated on line based on
a measure of tracking errors. In contrast, the latter introduced a
concept of function learning instead of that of parameter learning.
Recently, two researches have dealt with the adaptive coor-
dinated control of a multi-manipulator system. Walker and co-
workers 1161 proposed an efficient adaptive control algorithm for the
control of two manipulators transporting an object, in which only
the dynamic uncertainty about the object was considered. Hu and
Goldenberg [17] developed an adaptive coordinated controller for m
coordinated robot arms with uncertain dynamics. This scheme can
achieve global asymptotic convergence of position tracking errors
and force tracking errors but the price is that contact forces and
their derivatives should be measured.
In this paper, we consider the adaptive coordinated control
scheme for multiple arms transporting an object -along a preplanned
trajectory, in which all robot end-effectors are assumed to be rigidly
attached to the object. First, we reformulate the dynamic model
proposed in [81 into a more concise one which is more amiable to
controller design and stability analysis. Then, incorporting simi-
lar conceptual development of the adaptive motion control scheme
proposed in [11], an adaptive coordinated control law is presented.
Detailed analyses on tracing properties of the object position, ve-
locity and the internal forces exerted on the object are derived. The
paper shows that satisfactory tracking performance can be achieved
without using the measurement of forces and their derivatives. Some
implementation issues are also discussed toward the end of this pa-
per.
The paper is organized as follows: In section 2, the dynam-
ics formulation of the multi-manipulator system is introduced. In
section 3, the adaptive coordinated control scheme and the track-
ing properties of the overall system are presented. Finally, some
implementation issues as well as discussions are stated in section 4.
 2. DYNAMIC FORMULATION OF A COORDINATED
MULT[-MNIPULATOR SYSTEM
2.1 DYNAMIC EQUATION
Although several authors [1]-[8] have proposed a variety of dy-
namic modeb for a multi-manipulator system, in this section we take
a different point of view to reformulate the dynamic model of the
system proposed in [8) so as to end up with a more concise model. It
will be seen shortly that such a model allows one easily to design a
suitable controller for the system as well as to analyze the resulting
controlled system.
Consider a coordinated multi-manipulator system, as shown in
Fig. 1, in which all robot end-effectors hold the same object and
move in a coordinated fashion to transport the object along a pre-
specified trajectory. To failitate the dynamic formulation, the fol-
lowing assumptions are made
(Al) Each manipulator is nonredundant and, hence, all manipulators
have the same number of joints.
(A2) All the end-effectors of the manipulators are rigidly attached to
the common object so that there is no relative motion between
the object and any end-effector.
From the above assumptions, the dynamics of the multi-
manipulator system can be summarized by the following set of equa-
tions:
Equation of motion for robot i, i= 1,...,m,:
trajectory of the object is given, then the joint trajectory of each
robot is uniquely determined due to the assumptions (Al)-(A2).
Owing to the dependence among position variables, the equations
(2.1)-(2.3) would not be adequate for one to analyze the dynamic
behavior of this system. With this observation in mind, we will treat
elements of the object coordinate x, as independent position vai-
ables and reformulate the dynamic equation (2.1) of each robot in
terms of these variables so as to describe the whole system behavior
with a minimal set of variables. Before we proceed, the following as-
sumption is made to establish the dependence of the joint coordinate
qi upon the object coordinate x,.
(A3) Each Jacobian matrix Ji is nonsingular in the domain of inter-
est.
A direct implication of the assumption (A3) is that, by the
implicit function theorem [181, there exist a unique function Qt
RI RI and an open set 0 E Rk such that
hi(Pi(x,)) = r,(xC) for all xc E 0 and i = 1,... ,m (2.5)
It is quite straightforward that the function Q, can be resolved
through the composition of the two functions, namely, the inverse
kinematic function of robot i and the coordinate transformation r,.
Moreover, if the functions hi and r, are sufficiently smooth, then
derivatives of the function %i with respect to z, up to the second
order will exist. In terms of the function St and its time derivatives,
the dependence of qi, 4,, 4i upon xz, 4r i, can be easily obtained
as folows.

M,(qj)4i + Ci(qi,4i)4i + Gi(qi) = -i JTfi (2.1) qi= fi(x)

4, =Ei(x )c
Equation of motion for the common object: 4i = Ei(xc)ic + Ft(x0,ct)tc (2.6)
m where
M0(zc)i, + C0(xz,t + G0(xc) = E =AT!- ATf (2.2) E (z,) = a'l(z')
OXc = Ji-)Ai
Constraint equations:
Fi(x,, i,) =dEi(zx)
dt
=i hi(qi) = iri(x.)
= (2.3) With the help of (2.6), the dynamic equation (2.1) of robot i can be
i =J4i = A,±r
= i = 1,.i..
IM. (2.4) reformulated in terms of the object coordinate rc as
where the following notations are used: Mi(xcWi + Cj(z,,i4)i0 + Gi(x,) ETri
_~~~~~~~~ - ATf (2.7)
* qi : A k x 1 vector to represent the joint coordinate of the i-th
robot arm. where
* xi : A k x 1 vector which denotes the Cartesian coordinate of ki ETMi(St(z3))Ei
=
the end-effector of robot i.
* zc: A k x 1 vector which denotes the Cartesian coordinate of Cs Et (Mi(ni(c))Fi + Ci(Q(x), Eii,)) Es
=
the center of mass of the object. Gi = ETGi(fi(x,)) (2.8)
* ri : A k x 1 vector to stand for the actuator inputs of robot i.
* fi: A vector of forces exerted on the object by the end-effector Summing the dynamic equations (2.7) for all robots and the
of robot i. dynamic equation (2.2) of the object, the resulting equation is
* f : A km x 1 composite force vector defined by f = mi m m _m
* hi(.): A function Rk " Rk, which characterizes the forward (EMi +Mo)ic+(ECi +c0)ic + (E G + Go) = E ETir
i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1
kinematics of robot i. (2.9)
* Tr,(.): A function Rk + Rk, which characterize the coordinate or can be expressed more concisely as
transformation from the the object frame to the end-effector
frame of robot i. m
* M,, M0 : The inertia matrices of robot i and the object respec- M(xz)i* + C(xz,:c)±, + G(z0) = E ET7ri. (2.10)
tively. i=l
* Ciqi, C,zC : The vectors of centrifugal and Coriolis forces of Note that the equations (2.10) and (2.7) completely characterize
robot i and the object respectively. the dynamic behavior of the multi-manipulator system. This can
* G0,,6, : The vectors of gravitational forces of robot i and the be easily observed from the following procedure: first, resolving the
object respectively. differential equation (2.10), we can obtain the object trajectory z0(t)
* Ji: A k x k Jacobian matrix defined by JI =9hi(qi)/Dqi. and, hence, determine the joint trajectory of each robot through the
* Ai : A k x k Jacobian matrix defined by Ai = 9r,i(x,/Ozx equation (2.6). The evolution of contact forces fi(t), i =1,..,
a A The km x m composite Jacobian matrix defined by A = can then be obtained from the algebraic equation (2.7).
[AT,. ATIT
It is noteworthy that there are totally k(m + 1) position vari- 2.2 INTERNAL FORCES
ables in the equations (2.1)12.3) but, in fact, only m variables of As shown in the equation (2.2), the motion of the object is
them are independent. This can be easily seen from that once the driven by the resulting force vector ATf which is composed of the

3051
arm tip force of each robot. Since the matrix AT is noasquare and
full row-rank, it has a nontdvial null space S = {fi E RkIIIATfI =
01. If a composite force vector f within the subspace S, then the set
of contact forces fi, i = 1, . . . , m, will have no resultat effect on the
motion of the object but wil contribute to the buildup of internal
forces. Accordingly, for a desired motion of the object, we can find
infinitely many sets of contact forces to yield the desired motion.
The following definition wil signify within each contact force the
component of internal force.
Definition 2.1: If a composite force vector f produces the desired
object motion in equation (2.2), then the internal force fi is defined
as
fI = f - (AT)+(M0ie + Co4c + Go) (2.11)
where
(AT)+ = A(ATA)-1,
or expressed in component form as
fIj = fj- (AT)t(M4i' + Coxc + Go) (2.12)
where flj and (AT)t denote the j-th segment of f and (AT)+ re-
spectively.
The consideration of the intemal forces is twobld: First, in
some case, the end-effector of each robot is, in fact, not rigidly
attached to the object. However, by introducing suitable internal
forces such that each contact force can lie within a friction cone [6],
the assumption (A2) will, then, be regarded as being satisfied. Sec-
ond, sometimes, the contact forces can not be arbitrarily generated
owing to the constraints imposed by, for example, joint actuator
limit, force tolerance of the object, and others. Hence, the internal
forces, under such circumstances, can be set to fulfil these con-
straints but without altering the motion of the object.
3. ADAPTIVE COORDINATED CONTROLLER
As described in the preceding section, during the coordinated
operation of multiple robots, both the position tracking of the ob-
ject and the internal forces exerted on the object should be taken
into account. Let z(t) and f&i(t) denote the desired motion of the
object and the desired internal force of robot i respectively. The con-
trol objective is then to design a coordinated controller to achieve
asymptotic tracking of both the object position and the internal
forces, that is, to yield
i(t) -* 0 and fr(t) -. 0 as t X-- m
where i(t) = we(t) - zd(t) and fQi(t) = fi,(t) - fi(t).
Remark: The desired internal forces are usually dependent on the
configurations of the multi-manipulator system and, hence, can not
be specified prior to the execution of a coordinated task. Nonethe-
less, the internal forces can be on-line determined through, for ex-
ample, an optimization algorithm [6].
If full knowledge of the multi-manipulator system is available,
an inverse dynamics control scheme [81 can be realized as folows
E[' ri = M.i(zT.)v+TN,(xz,t)+ A7 (AT )t(Mov+No)+ATfi (3.1)
=tcCi(x )*c + G,p0)
= C4,(x ,IC)*,C + Go(x)
V = Xt- K,i - Kp4,
with Kp, K,, and Kf being positive definite matrices. The fol-
lowing proposition summarizes the exponential tracking properties
achieved by this inverse dynamics scheme. The proof of the propo-
sition can be found in 18].
3052
Proposition Li: Consider the multi-manipulator system whose
dynamics are governed by (2.7) and (2.10). The following will be
true provided the coordinated control law (3.1) is used.
(i) i converges to zero exponentially.
(ii) fIi converges to zero exponentially, i = 1,... m.
In real practice, we can hardly know the complex dynamics of
each robot system and the inertial properties of the object a priori,
therefore, care should be taken in that if there is an uncertainty
about the parameters of the system dynamics, for example, link
mass, moment of inertia, and location of mass center, the aforemen-
tioned inverse dynamics controller may give degraded performance
and may even incur instability. In this section, we will propose an
adaptive coordinated controller to handle the problems caused by
imprecise knowledge about system parameters. Before we proceed,
we Will summarize some useful dynamical properties of the multi-
manipulator system in the following proposition. The proof of the
proposition is provided in Appendix.
Proposition 3.2: For the multi-manipulator system described in
the previous section, the foUlawing properties hold.
(i) The inertia matrices MFi(x4), i = 1. m, and M0(x¢) are
symmetric and positive definite in the domain of interest. More
specifically, there exists a positive constant a such that
Mi(x.c)> aI=, ...,m, and Mo(C) >.alk, for al zc E O
where Ik denotes the k x k identity matrix.
(ii) By a proper choice of Ci(q1,4i) to define C,, the matrix
Mi(zT) - 2CWi(x., ) can be skew-symmetric, that is,
yT(M,(') - 2Ci(zc,t,))y = 0, for all y E R' and Z,, E 0
(Wii) The matrices Mk, C,, Gi, M0, C. and G. are linear in the dy-
namic parameters of robot i and the object. More specifically,
the following decompositions will hold.
Mjx0$)8 + CJ(x0, ±0)i + Cd(xc) w[(zc, i0, *t u)s,
~ (3.2)
where w4(r,ix,ci,iu) and w,(z,,i u3 are known function
matrices and the vectors Gi and 6,, consist of dynamic parame-
ters of robot i and the object respectively.
Now, we are ready to introduce the adaptive coordinated con-
troBler by borrowing some conceptual development of the adaptive
motion control scheme proposed in [11]. Define the auxiliary signals
Zr and s as
X, = d kir
- (3.4)
S = Z0C - Zr (3.5)
where kr is a positive constant. Note that the siga s is designeld
such that if s is square-integrable, then i approaches zero as time
goes to infinity [19]. Desip the control signal of robot i as
EJri = w[i t+ AT(AT)i(w4Go . KDS) + ATfdi (3.6)
where di and U,, denote the estimates of °i and U,, respectively. Then
the summation of these control signals yields
E E7r = wT(.,7,x,,x,)e
,
i=1
- M(%)4r + 6(zc, ic)ir + t(z,) - KDs (3.7)
w= Wm (Tc, Mc, -Tr-,-*;r) zd
WO(Zc, l*c, Xr, Xir) °o
where the matrices M(z), C(z,,,t), and G(z,) denote the esti-
mates of M(r,), C(z,,,*), and G(x,) respectively.
 The parameter adaptation laws are designed as, i = 1. ,m where d= U - =9, and . T O , T Define the Lyapunov
function candidate
d,= -1w,s,s ri > 0, (3.8)
V(t) = 1sTM(Z)s + 'Trre
and
eo = -r; Lwos, rO > 0 (3.9) where I' = dig(rI,..rm,ro). and then take its time derivative
where Oi Oi Pi and GO O UO
= - = - along trajectories of (3.8)-(3.10) to yield the foHowing with the help
of the proposition 3.2:
Remark: It is noteworthy that the measurement of the contact
forces f,, i = 1,..., m, is not needed to implement the control signals dY(t) = sT(M - C)s - STKDS STWT# s+ rr
+

in (3.6).
Before we proceed with the main theorem of this section, which - -STKDS < O
summarizes the effect of this adaptive control law, a lemma will be Therefore, all signals in V(t) are bounded and s is square-integrable
first given to facilitate our subsequent analysis. and, hence, the position error i converges to zero asymptotically.
Lemma 3-3: Let Q(t) : R+ Rk satisfy the following properties: This, in addition, implies the boundedness of x:, A, i as a result from
(1) Q(t) converges to zero asymptoticaly. (3.4), (3.5), (3.10), and the proposition 3.2. Now, by differentiating
both sides of (3.10), we can easily see that i and, hence, X(3) are
Urn Q(t) = 0 almost everywhere bounded. Then, use of Lemma 3.3 readily implies
that i, i and, hence, s, A tend to zero asymptoticaly. This therefore
(2) The derivatives of Q(t) are bounded almost everywhere up to concludes the result (la). The boundedness of the internal force
the (n + 1)-th order, i.e., errors can be seen from the following equation derived from (2.7),
(3.2)-(3.6).
Q (t)() < oo t.e., for i 0, ..n + 1
=
_ATi = Mi+CiS-JisuT A[(iAT
+ )7(MO + C0s + KDS -WT8)
(3.11)
then we can conclude
Since all terms on the right hand side of (3.11) are bounded and
lin Q(t)(') 0, for i =1,...,n. the matrix Ai is nonsingular, the internal force error fti is bounded.
t-=o =
Moreover, since the signals s and A tend to zero asymptotically, the
residual internal force error is bounded by the norm of the parameter
Since the proof of lemma 3.3 cab be directly deduced from [14], errors Gi and .,, which proves the result (lb).
we wfll omit it here. Again from (3.10), we find that the signal wTJ approaches zero
Remark: Lemma 3.3 points out that derivatives of a smooth con- asymptotically. Hence, if w(x0, iC,4i,,4i,) is PE, then from the stan-
vergent function should posses the same convergence property. This dard arguments of adaptive control [20]-[21], the result (2a) is en-
fact is useful in the analysis of a class of control systems. sured, which, in turn, implies the convergence of the force errors in
(2b). 0
The main result of this section is stated in the following theo-
rem. Remark: As shown in (3.11), the residual internal force error fli
Theorem 3.4: Consider the multi-manipulator system whose dy- is mainly attributed to the dynamics uncertainty of robot i and the
namics are governed by (2.7) and (2.10). If the derivatives of the object. It can be shown that if accurate measurement of the contact
bounded desired position trajectry Zd are bounded almost every- forces is available, the part of the internal force error attributed to
where up to the third order, then the following will be true provided the dynamics uncertainty of robot i can be reduced through the use
the adaptive control laws (3.6)-(3.9) is used. of the force feedback. However, the other part attributed to the
1. (a) The signals xc, i, 9, and Ui, i = 1,...,m are bounded. dynamics uncertainty of the object is hardly affected by using the
Moreover, the position, velocity and the acceleration of the ob- force feedback.
ject track the desired ones asymptoticaBy, i.e., Remark: The adaptive control law (3.6)-(3.9) can be implemented
in a decentralized manner. This fact can be easily seen by noting
i(t) - 0, i(t) 0 and -. 0 as t -- no. that the control signals and the parameter adaptation law of robot
i involves only signals of both robot i and the object. Hence, by
(b) The internal force error of robot i, namely, J'i, is bounded utilizing a paralel processing architecture, the whole computation
by the norm of the parameter errors, ii and 9,, i.e., burden can be distributed to each robot system.
iifli I[A11tIi t B2 1i0011
for some 31, 032 > 0.
2. If w(Xcisc,±r,ir) IS persistently exciting (PE [14][20][21]), 4. COrNCLUSION
then
(a) the parameter errors converge to zero, i.e., In this paper, an adaptive coordinated control scheme for a
multi-manipulator system has been presented. Global convergence
lim io(t) = O and lim 49X(t) - 0, i = 1,...rm of trajectory tracking errors is obtained. The tracking errors of the
internal forces are bounded and the bound is proportional to the
(b) The internal force errors converge to zero, i.e., norm of the parameter errors. It has also been shown that if the
desired trajectory is chosen to satisfy the PE condition as has been
ulrm fi(t) = 0, i = I,...,m mentioned earlier, then the force errors will converge to zero along
with the parameter errors. Even if the PE condition can not be
achieved, there are still two possible ways to reduce the force errors.
Proof of Theorem 3.4: Substituting the equation (3.7) into First, by utilizing force feedback, the part of forces errors attributed
(2.10), we can obtain the position error dynamics: to the dynamics uncertainty of robot arms can be reduced. Second,
carefully design some exercising trajectory of the object before the
M(x)A+ C( t)s+ K = WT(Xc,Ic,Xr XTr (3.10) actual task execution such that PE condition is attained in this
exercising phase so as to guarantee the smallness of the parameter

3053
errors when the real task proceeds. Then, according to the result
(lb) of Theorem 3.4, the internal force errors can then be much
reduced.
The computation burden of the proposed scheme can be dis-
tributed in a decentralized manner such that the computation time
in a control cycle is roughly equal to that in the case of control-
ling a single arm adaptively. Furthermore, two strategies similar to
the ones proposed in [13][14] can be also incorporated to increase
the computational efficiency. One strategy is to off-line compute
the complicated function matrix wi and w0 using the desired ob-
ject position and velocity instead of the actual measurement. The
other strategy is to reformulate the proposed scheme into an efficient
one based on Newton-Euler dynamics formulation. The techniques
to convert the proposed scheme based on the Lagrange-Euler dy-
namics formulation into its counterpart based on the Newton-Euler
dynamics formulation can be found in the recent work [241. Finaly,
for these two modifications, it can be shown that identical results in
theorem 3.4 can also be guaranteed.
APPENDIX
Proof of Proposition 3.2:
(i) It is well known that the inertia matrix of a general mechanical
manipulator is symmetric and positive definite. Hence, if we
properly choose the domain 0, we can yield the least singular
values of the matrices Ei(x,), i = 1, .. 7 m, are bounded away
from zero for all z0 E 0 and this immediately implies that there
exist positive constants ai, i = 1,... ,m, and a0 such that
Mzi(x) > aiIk, i = 1. m, and Mo(x,) > aIk, for all x, E 0
Then the positive constant a is simply selected as
a =min {ai, a,,}
(ii) It has been shown by various authors [11][12] that, for a proper
choice of Ci, the matrix M. - 2Ci wil be skew symmetric. Now,
by definition, the matrix Mi - 2C, can be rewritten as
Mi - 2Ci ET(Mi - 2Ci)Ei + FiJM,-E
= - E[TMiFi
and, hence, is skew symmetric too.
(Iii) The decompositions in (3.2) and (3.3) can be easily seen from
two facts. First, the matrices Mi, Ci, Gi, M., C,, and G. are
linear in the dynamic parameters [10][11]. Second, the matrices
Ei are known and implementable. 0 [23] B.B. Peterson and K.S. Narendra, "Bounded Error Adaptive
REFERENCES
[1] C. 0. Alford, and S. M. Belyen, "Coordinated Control of Two
Robot Arms," Proc. Int. Conf. on Robotics, Atlanta Georgia,
pp. 468-473, 1984.
[2] T. Tar, A. Bejczy, and X. Yuan, "Control of Two Coordinated
Robots," Proc. IEEE Conf. Robotics and Autonmt., pp. 1193-
1202, 1986.
[3] Y.F. Zheng, and J.Y.S. Luh, 'Joint Torques for Control of l wo
Coordinated Moving Robots," Proc. IEEE Conf. Robotics Au-
tomat., San Francisco, pp. 1375-1380, 1986.
[4] S. Arimoto, "Coorperative Motion Control of Multi-Robot
Arms or Fingers," Proc. IEEE Conf. Robotics Automat., pp.
1407-1412, 1987.
3054
[5] S. Hayati, "Hybrid Position/Force Control of Multi-Arm Coor-
perating Robots," Proc. IEEE Conf. Robotics Automat., pp.
82-89, 1986.
[6] Y. Nakamura, K. Nagai, and T. Yoshikawa, "Dynamics and Sta-
bility in Coordination of Multiple Robotic Mechanisms," Int.
J. Robotics Res., vol. 8, no. 2, April, 1989.
[71 3. Wen and K. Kreutz, "Stability Analysis of PD Control for
Multiple Rigid Robot Manipulators Holding a Common Rigid
Object", Preprints.
[8] P. Hsu, "Control of Mechanical Manipulators," Ph.D. disserta-
tion, Dep. Elect. Eng. Comput. Sci., Univ. California at Berke-
ley, Nov. 1988.
[9] M. Raibert and 3J.. Craig, "Hybrid Position/Force Control of
Manipulators," ASME J. Dynamic Systems, Mewaurement and
Control, vol. 102, pp. 126-133, 1981.
[10] J. J. Craig, P. Hsu, and S. S. Sastry, "Adaptive Control of
Mechanical Manipulators," Int. J. Robotics Res., vol. 6, no. 2,
1986.
[11] J. Slotine and W. Li, "On the Adaptive Control of Robot Ma-
nipulators," Int. J. Robotics Res., vol. 6, no. 2, 1986.
[12] N. Sadegh and R. Horowitz, "Stability Analysis of an Adap-
tive Controller for Robotic Manipulators,"in Proc. IEEE Conf.
Robotics Automat., vol. 3, pp. 1223-1229, 1987.
[13] M. W. Walker, "Adaptive Control of Manipulator Containing
Closed Kinematic Loops," IEEE Trans. Robotics Automat., vol.
6, no. 1, pp. 10-19, Feb. 1990.
[14] N. Sadegh and R. Horowitz, "Stability and Robustness Analysis
of a Class of Adaptive Controllers," Int. J. Robotics Res., vol.
9, no. 3, pp. 74-92, June 1990.
[15] W. Messner, R. Horowitz, W. Kao, and M.Boals, "A New Adap-
tive Learning Rule," RAMP 89-10/ESRC 89-12, University of
California at Berkeley, April 1989.
[16] M. Walker, D. Kim and J. Dionise, "Adaptive Coordinated Mo-
tion Control of Two Manipulator Arms," Proc. IEEE Conf.
Robotics Automat., pp. 1084-1090, 1989.
[17] Y. Hu and A.A. Goldenberg, "An Adaptive Approach to Motion
and Force Control of Multiple Coordinated Robot Arms," Proc.
IEEE Conf. Robotics Automat., pp. 1091-1096, 1989.
[18] Apostol, Mathematical Analysis., Addison-Wesley, 1977
[19] C. A. Desoer and M. Vidyasagar, Feedback Systems: Input-
Output Properties. New York: Academic Press.
[20] R. Bitmead, "Persistence of Excitation Conditions and the Con-
vergence of Adaptive System," IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory,
val. IT-30, no. 2, pp. 183-191, March 1984.
[21] K. S. Nazendra and A. M. Annaswamny, Persistence Excitation
in Adaptive Systems," INT. J. Conir., vol. 45, no. 1, pp. 127-
160, 1987.
[22] G. Kreisselmeier and K.S. Narendra, "Stable Model Reference
Adaptive Control in the Prensence of Bounded Disturbance,'
IEEE Trans. Automat. Contr., AC-27, no. 6, pp. 1169-1175,
Dec. 1982.
Control," IEEE 7rans. Automat. Contr., AC-27, no. 6, pp.
1161-1168, Dec. 1982.
[24] J.H. Jean and L.C. Fu, "Adaptive Hybrid Control Strategies
for Constrained Robots," Submitted to IEEE Conf. Robotics
Automat., 1991.
Fig. 1 A coordinated multi-manipulator system transporting an object