2.2.a.lecture Gianluca Antonelli

Introduction to modeling and control
of underwater vehicle-manipulator systems

Gianluca Antonelli
Università di Cassino e del Lazio Meridionale
antonelli@unicas.it
http://webuser.unicas.it/lai/robotica
http://www.eng.docente.unicas.it/gianluca antonelli
TRIDENT school
Gianluca Antonelli TRIDENT school, Mallorca, 1 october 2012
Targeted audience and talks shape
SAUVIM
50 minutes talk about the mathematical foundations of
Underwater Vehicle Manipulator Systems (UVMS)
Educational shape (entry level)
knowledge of
mathematics, physics
control
basic robotics
equations, equations still equations. . .
Outline
ALIVE
UVMSs
Introduction
Mathematical modeling
Two words about dynamic control
Kinematic control
(semi)autonomus UVMSs
PETASUS
Use of a manipulator is common for ROV, mainly in remotely
controlled or in a master-slave conguration
Among the rst autonomus modes:
AMADEUS I & II before 2000, EU
SAUVIM 1997, USA
PETASUS, Korea
ALIVE 2000-2003, EU
Twin Burger + manipulator, Japan
TRIDENT 2010-2012, EU
Notation
1
y
z
b
1
x
z
(pitch)
(roll)
(yaw)
(heave)
(sway)
y
b
(surge)
x
b
Forces and
1
,
2

1
,
2
moments
Motion along x Surge X u x
Motion along y Sway Y v y
Motion along z Heave Z w z
Rotation about x Roll K p
Rotation about y Pitch M q
Rotation about z Yaw N r
1
[Fossen(1994)]
Rigid body attitude
Euler angles commonly used
roll
pitch
yaw
ok for the vehicle, designed stable in roll and pitch
For the end-eector possible issues of representation singularities
non-minimal representations (quaternions)
Rigid body kinematics
=
_
2
_
R
6
=
_
2
_
R
6
and by dening the matrix J
e
(R
I
B
) R
66
J
e
(R
I
B
) =
_
R
B
I
O
33
O
33
J
k,o
(R
I
B
)
_
it is
= J
e
(R
I
B
)
body-fixed velocities
Rigid body dynamics
moving in the free space
M
RB
+C
RB
() =
v
M
RB
=
_
mI
3
mS(r
b
C
)
mS(r
b
C
) I
O
b
_
R
66
body-fixed acceleration
6-dof force/moment at the body

Added mass and inertia
A body moving in a uid accelerates it ( 1000 kg/m
3
)
Need to account for an additional inertia
(the added mass is not a quantity to be added to the body such that
it has an increased mass)
For submerged bodies, with common AUV shape at low velocities:
M
A
= diag {X
u
, Y
v
, Z
w
, K
p
, M
q
, N
r
}
C
A
=
_
_
0 0 0 0 Z
w
w Y
v
v
0 0 0 Z
w
w 0 X
u
u
0 0 0 Y
v
v X
u
u 0
0 Z
w
w Y
v
v 0 N
r
r M
q
q
Z
w
w 0 X
u
u N
r
r 0 K
p
p
Y
v
v X
u
u 0 M
q
q K
p
p 0
_
_
Damping
Viscosity of the uid causes dissipative drag and lift forces to the body
lift
drag
relative ow
The simplest model is drag-only, diagonal, linear/quadratic in velocity
D
RB
()
D
RB
() = diag {X
u
, Y
v
, Z
w
, K
p
, M
q
, N
r
} +
diag
_
X
u|u|
|u| , Y
v|v|
|v| , Z
w|w|
|w| , K
p|p|
|p| , M
q|q|
|q| , N
r|r|
|r|
_
Current
Assume a current constant and irrotational in the inertial frame
I
c
=
_
c,x
c,y
c,z
0
0
0
_
_

I
c
= 0
eects added considering the relative velocity in body-xed frame
r
= R
B
I

I
c
in the Coriolis/centripetal and damping
Current
o
b
o
b
x
b
x
b
y
b
y
b
o
x
y
I
c
intuitively, the current is pushing the vehicle

Gravity and buoiancy
o
b
o
b
x
b
x
b
z
b
z
b
o
x
z
r
g
r
g
f
g
f
g
r
b
r
b
f
b
f
b
M
r
g
I
f
G
(R
B
I
) = R
B
I
_
_
0
0
W
_
_
f
B
(R
B
I
) = R
B
I
_
_
0
0
B
_
_
M
R
= r
B
G
f
G
(R
B
I
) +r
B
B
f
G
(R
B
I
)
linear in the 3 parameters: Wr
B
G
Br
B
B
constant in body-fixed
Some dynamic considerations
Considering the sole vehicle two eects aects steady state
current eect, constant in the inertial frame
restoring forces, (depends on) constant in the body-xed frame
Proper integral/adaptive actions need to be designed for ne
positioning to avoid disturbance caused by the controller
2
2
[Antonelli(2007)]
Some dynamic considerations
Considering the sole vehicle two eects aects steady state
current eect, constant in the inertial frame
restoring forces, (depends on) constant in the body-xed frame
Proper integral/adaptive actions need to be designed for ne
positioning to avoid disturbance caused by the controller
2
I
c
I
c
inertial
body-xed
current
compensation
during a 90
rotation
2
[Antonelli(2007)]
Thrusters
6 or more for full vehicle control (thrust required also in hovering)
force/moment (nonlinear) function of
propeller revolution
uid speed
input torque
aected by several parameters
uid density
tunnel cross-sectional area
tunnel length
propeller diameter and input-output volumetric owrate
main cause of bandwidth constraints and limit cycles
Some references
For modeling and control of marine vehicles in a control perspective:
[Fossen(1994)]
[Fossen(2002)]
[Antonelli et al.(2008)Antonelli, Fossen, and Yoerger]
[Fossen(2011)]
UVMS kinematics
O
i
ee
end-effector velocities
Jacobian
system velocities
ee
=
_

ee1

ee2
_
= J
w
(R
I
B
, q) =
_
_
2
q
_
_
UVMS dynamics
Dynamics via classical Newton-Euler equations by propagating the
velocities and forces
B
i
C
i
O
i1
O
i
r
i1,i
r
i1,C
r
i1,B
r
i,C
f
i
,
i
f
i+1
,
i+1
i
g
m
i
g
d
i
UVMS dynamics in matrix form
M(q)
+C(q, ) +D(q, ) +g(q, R

I
B
) =
formally equal to a ground-fixed industrial manipulator
3
however. . .
Uncertainty in the model knowledge
Low bandwidth of the sensors readings
Diculty to control the vehicle in hovering
Dynamic coupling between vehicle and manipulator
Kinematic redundancy of the system
3
[Siciliano et al.(2008)Siciliano, Sciavicco, Villani, and Oriolo]
UVMS dynamics
Movement of vehicle and manipulator coupled
movement of the vehicle carrying the manipulator
law of conservation of momentum
Need to coordinate
at velocity level kinematic control
at torque level dynamic control
4
4
[McLain et al.(1996b)McLain, Rock, and Lee]
[McLain et al.(1996a)McLain, Rock, and Lee]
Need for coordination
Coordination and redundancy exploitation is required
5
:
Redundancy at torque level?
Need to exactly compensate for
the dynamics, not appropriate
for the underwater environment
Space manipulator literature?
The assumption of the
momentum conservation is not
valid
5
[Khatib(1987), Sentis(2007),
Nenchev et al.(1992)Nenchev, Umetani, and Yoshida]
5
:
valid
5
5
:
valid
5
Needs for coordination
let us move to the kinematical level
What is coming next
an example
a short review
algorithms & tasks for UVMSs
balance movement between vehicle/manipulator
A rst kinematic solution
Hoping the vehicle in hovering is not the best strategy to e.e. ne
positioning
6
, better to kinematically compensate with the manipulator
6
[Hildebrandt et al.(2009)Hildebrandt, Christensen, Kerdels, Albiez, and Kirchner]
Kinematic control in pills
A robotic system is kinematically redundant when it possesses more
degrees of freedom than those required to execute a given task
Redundancy may be used to add additional tasks and to handle
singularities
Example for the sole end-eector trajectory
ee,d

d
, q
d

, q
IK
control
off-line trajectory planning not appropriate underwater
Kinematic control in pills -2-
Starting from a generic m-dimensional task
= f(, q) R
m
it is required to invert
= J(, q)
The congurations at which J R
m6+n
is rank decient are
kinematic singularities
The mobility of the structure is reduced
Innite solutions to the inverse kinematics problem might exist
Close to a kinematic singularity at small task velocities can
correspond large joint velocities
= J inverted by solving proper optimization problems
Pseudoinverse
= J
= J
T
_
JJ
T
_
1

Transpose-based
= J
T

Weighted pseudoinverse
= J
W
= W
1
J
T
_
JW
1
J
T
_
1

Damped Least-Squares
= J
T
_
JJ
T
+
2
I
m
_
1

need for closed-loop also. . .
Handling several tasks
7
Extended Jacobian
Add additional (6 +n) m constraints
h(, q) = 0 with associated J
h
such that the problem is squared with
_

0
_
=
_
J
J
h
_
7
[Chiaverini et al.(2008)Chiaverini, Oriolo, and Walker]
Augmented Jacobian
An additional task is given
h
= h(, q) with associated J
h
such that the problem is squared with
_

h
_
=
_
J
J
h
_


A mapping from the controlled variable to the task space
An inverse mapping is required
Additional tasks may be considered (e.g. task priority)


Task priority redundancy resolution
h
h
further projected on the the null space of the higher priority one
= J
+
_
J
h
_
I J
J
__
_

h
J
h
J

_
Singularity robust task priority redundancy resolution
8
h
h
further projected on the the null space of the higher priority one
= J
+
_
I J
J
_
J
h

h
8
we are talking about algorithmic singularities here. . .
AMADEUS
Agility task priority
9
Task priority framework to handle both precision and set tasks
Each task is the norm of the corresponding error (i.e., m
i
= 1)
Recursive constrained least-squares within the set satisfying
higher-priority tasks
9
[Casalino et al.(2012)Casalino, Zereik, Simetti, Sperindè, and Turetta]
Behavioral algorithms (behavior=task), bioinspired, artical potentials
sensors
behavior b
2
behavior a
1
supervisor
1
behavior c

Tasks to be controlled
Given 6 +n DOFs and m-dimensional tasks: End-eector
position, m = 3
pos./orientation, m = 6
distance from a target, m = 1
alignment with the line of sight, m = 2
Manipulator joint-limits
several approaches proposed, m = 1 to n, e.g.
h(q) =
n
i=1
1
c
i
q
i,max
q
i,min
(q
i,max
q
i
)(q
i
q
i,min
)
Drag minimization, m = 1
10
h(q) = D
T
(q, )WD(q, )
within a second order solution
= J
_

J
_
k
_
I J
J
_
__
h
h
q
_
+
h
_
10
[Sarkar and Podder(2001)]
Manipulability/singularity, m = 1
h(q) =
det
_
JJ
T
_
(In
11
priorities dynamically swapped between singularity and e.e.)
joints
inhibited direction
singularity
singularity
set
close to
11
[Kim et al.(2002)Kim, Marani, Chung, and Yuh]
Restoring moments:
m = 3 keep close gravity-buoyancy of the overall system
12
m = 2 align gravity and buoyancy (SAUVIM is 4 tons)
13
f
b
f
g
2
12
[Han and Chung(2008)]
13
[Marani et al.(2010)Marani, Choi, and Yuh]
Obstacle avoidance m = 1
Workspace-related variables
Vehicle distance from the bottom, m = 1
Vehicle distance from the target, m = 1
Sensors conguration variables
Vehicle roll and pitch, m = 2
Misalignment between the camera optical axis and the target line
of sight, m = 2
However. . .
End eector going out of the workspace and one (eventually weighted)
task always leads to singularity
manipulator stretched
Balance movement between vehicle and manipulator
Need to distribute the motion e.g.:
move mainly the manipulator when target in workspace
move the vehicle when approaching the workspace boundaries
move the vehicle for large displacement
Some solutions, among them dynamic programming or fuzzy logic
Fuzzy logic to balance the movement
14
Within a weighted pseudoinverse framework
J
W
= W
1
J
T
_
JW
1
J
T
_
1
W
1
() =
_
(1 )I
6
O
6n
O
n6
I
n
_
with [0, 1] output of a fuzzy inference engine
Secondary tasks activated by additional fuzzy variables
i
[0, 1]
= J
W
( x
E,d
+K
E
e
E
) +
_
I J
W
J
W
_
_
i
J
s,i
w
s,i
_
Only one
i
active at once
Need to be complete, distinguishable, consistent and compact
Beyond the dicotomy fuzzy/probability theory very eective in
transferring ideas
14
[Antonelli and Chiaverini(2003)]
Dynamic programming to balance the movement
15
Freeze the vehicle velocity and implement the agility task priority
to the sole manipulator
Freeze the manipulator velocity and nd the vehicle velocity
needed for the remaining tasks components not satised
e
15
Dynamic programming to balance the movement
15
Freeze the vehicle velocity and implement the agility task priority
to the sole manipulator
Freeze the manipulator velocity and nd the vehicle velocity
needed for the remaining tasks components not satised
e
15
Acknowledge
Several researchers kindly provided the materials/video (or the
explications...) for this talk
In casual order:
ISME (Pino Casalino, . . . )
TRIDENT partners (Pedro Sanz, Pere Ridao, . . . )
SAUVIM partners (Junku Yuh, Giacomo Marani, . . . )
DFKI (Frank Kirchner)
OTTER (Tim McLain)
Bibliography I
G. Antonelli.
Underwater robots. Motion and force control of vehicle-manipulator systems.
Springer Tracts in Advanced Robotics, Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, D, 2nd
edition, June 2006.
G. Antonelli.
On the use of adaptive/integral actions for 6-degrees-of-freedom control of
autonomous underwater vehicles.
IEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering, 32(2):300312, April 2007.
G. Antonelli and S. Chiaverini.
Fuzzy redundancy resolution and motion coordination for underwater
vehicle-manipulator systems.
IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 11(1):109120, 2003.
G. Antonelli, T. Fossen, and D. Yoerger.
Springer Handbook of Robotics, chapter Underwater Robotics, pages 9871008.
B. Siciliano, O. Khatib, (Eds.), Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, D, 2008.
Bibliography II
G. Casalino, E. Zereik, E. Simetti, S. Torelli A. Sperindè, and A. Turetta.
Agility for underwater oating manipulation: Task & subsystem priority based
control strategy.
In 2012 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and
Systems, Vilamoura, PT, october 2012.
S. Chiaverini, G. Oriolo, and I. D. Walker.
Springer Handbook of Robotics, chapter Kinematically Redundant
Manipulators, pages 245268.
B. Siciliano, O. Khatib, (Eds.), Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, D, 2008.
T.I. Fossen.
Guidance and Control of Ocean Vehicles.
Chichester New York, 1994.
Bibliography III
T.I. Fossen.
Marine Control Systems: Guidance, Navigation and Control of Ships, Rigs and
Underwater Vehicles.
Marine Cybernetics, Trondheim, Norway, 2002.
T.I. Fossen.
Handbook of marine craft hydrodynamics and motion control.
Wiley, 2011.
J. Han and W.K. Chung.
Coordinated motion control of underwater vehicle-manipulator system with
minimizing restoring moments.
In Intelligent Robots and Systems, 2008. IROS 2008. IEEE/RSJ International
Conference on, pages 31583163. IEEE, 2008.
Bibliography IV
M. Hildebrandt, L. Christensen, J. Kerdels, J. Albiez, and F. Kirchner.
Realtime motion compensation for ROV-based tele-operated underwater
manipulators.
In IEEE OCEANS 2009-Europe, pages 16, 2009.
O. Khatib.
A unied approach for motion and force control of robot manipulators: The
operational space formulation.
IEEE Journal of Robotics and Automation, 3(1):4353, 1987.
J. Kim, G. Marani, WK Chung, and J. Yuh.
Kinematic singularity avoidance for autonomous manipulation in underwater.
Proceedings of PACOMS, 2002.
G. Marani, S.K. Choi, and J. Yuh.
Real-time center of buoyancy identication for optimal hovering in autonomous
underwater intervention.
Intelligent Service Robotics, 3(3):175182, 2010.
Bibliography V
T.W. McLain, S.M. Rock, and M.J. Lee.
Coordinated control of an underwater robotic system.
In Video Proceedings of the 1996 IEEE International Conference on Robotics
and Automation, pages 46064613, 1996a.
T.W. McLain, S.M. Rock, and M.J. Lee.
Experiments in the coordinated control of an underwater arm/vehicle system.
Autonomous robots, 3(2):213232, 1996b.
D. Nenchev, Y. Umetani, and K. Yoshida.
Analysis of a redundant free-ying spacecraft/manipulator system.
Robotics and Automation, IEEE Transactions on, 8(1):16, 1992.
N. Sarkar and T.K. Podder.
Coordinated motion planning and control of autonomous underwater
vehicle-manipulator systems subject to drag optimization.
Oceanic Engineering, IEEE Journal of, 26(2):228239, 2001.
Bibliography VI
L. Sentis.
Synthesis and Control of Whole-Body Behaviors in Humanoid Systems.
PhD thesis, Stanford University, 2007.
B. Siciliano, L. Sciavicco, L. Villani, and G. Oriolo.
Robotics: modelling, planning and control.
Springer Verlag, 2008.

2.2.a.lecture Gianluca Antonelli

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Descrição original:

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

2.2.a.lecture Gianluca Antonelli

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Introduction to modeling and control

of underwater vehicle-manipulator systems

6-dof force/moment at the body

intuitively, the current is pushing the vehicle

+C(q, ) +D(q, ) +g(q, R

Gianluca Antonelli TRIDENT school, Mallorca, 1 october 2012

A mapping from the controlled variable to the task space

A mapping from the controlled variable to the task space

Gianluca Antonelli TRIDENT school, Mallorca, 1 october 2012

Você também pode gostar