Proceedings of the 2006 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation
Orlando, Florida - May 2006
Gravity-Balancing of Classes of Industrial Robots
Abbas Fattah, Ph.D., Research Scientist; Sunil K. Agrawal, Ph.D., Professor
Mechanical Systems Laboratory, Department of Mechanical Engineering
University of Delaware, Newark, DE 19716
Email: fattah, agrawal@me.udel.edu
Abstract Gravity balancing of industrial robots is an impor-
tant issue because these robots may have massive links in order to
manipulate large payloads. In this paper, we present techniques
to gravity balance the weight of moving links in industrial robots
with various arrangements of joints. In a typical industrial robot,
the rst joint axis is parallel to the gravity vector, hence, the
weight of the rst moving link does not have any effect on gravity
balancing of the robot. Our approach for gravity balancing of
industrial robots uses two steps: (i) we locate the center of mass
of distal segments of the robot using auxiliary parallelograms;
(ii) we connect springs between the center of mass and other
members in the robot such that the total potential energy of the
system is invariant with conguration. In this paper, we present
designs for gravity balancing of classes of industrial robots with
revolute and prismatic joints.
I. I NTRODUCTION
A machine is said to be gravity balanced if joint actuator
inputs are not needed to keep the system in equilibrium at any
conguration of the machine. Gravity balancing of industrial
robots is an important issue because these robots usually have
massive links. Gravity balancing would potentially decrease
the required actuator efforts during motion. Over the years, a
number of methods have been proposed for gravity balancing
of machines and serial robots ([1], [2]) through clever designs
using counterweights, springs, and auxiliary parallelograms.
Some mathematical descriptions of gravity balanced machines
are: (i) system center of mass remains inertially xed during
motion; (ii) potential energy remains invariant with congura-
tion of the system; (iii) system has counter masses that balance
the machine in every conguration. These mathematical condi-
tions have been physically realized through clever engineering
such as: (a) Countermass on each body of the machine is used
to inertially x the center of mass of the system ([3], [4]), (b)
springs are used at appropriate places in the machine such
that the sum total of the gravitational potential energy and
spring potential energy becomes invariant with conguration
([4], [5] ), (c) auxiliary parallelograms based on knowledge of
geometry and inertia property are used to physically determine
the center of mass of the machine [6].
In the literature, a number of methods have been proposed
for gravity balancing of industrial robots that include coun-
terweights [7] and springs ([8],[9],[10]). Diken proposed a
method to redistribute the mass of the manipulator links as
dynamically equivalent point masses at the joints and at the
center of mass of link. Then, the gravity balancing of the new
model was achieved by adding countermasses [7]. Segla et al.
formulated the problem of gravity balancing of an industrial
0-7803-9505-0/06/$20.00 2006 IEEE
6 DOF robot as an optimization problem [8]. They used the
link lengths and stiffness of the springs as design variables.
Simionescu et al. used helical springs for static balancing of
a spatial rotating link ([9],[10]). The methods presented in
these references were limited to a specic architecture of an
industrial robot. Another approach to reduce the inertia of an
industrial robot is to introduce mechanical transmissions to put
the motors on the base. These transmission systems are gear
trains, cables and pulleys and parallelogram linkages [11]. As
an example, Fanuc S-900W robot has a four-bar linkage to
transmit the motion of the third motor mounted on the waist
to the third joint.
In this paper, we present a method to balance classes
of industrial robots with anthropomorphic design, i.e., as a
concatenation of revolute (R), Prismatic (P) or spherical (S)
joints in series. These robots comprise a trunk, a shoulder, and
an elbow. The wrist is considered as a lumped mass at the end
of the robotic arm. We classify these robots into structures
shown in Table 1, while accounting for structures of most
industrial robots. We assume that the gravity vector is parallel
to the trunk axis of rotation. Hence, we characterize the robot
using the structure of second and higher joints. For example,
the structures of Fanuc, Puma, Kuka, and Scorbot are of the
Type (i). Research Robot has two legs, each with 7 DOF,
and consists of a spherical joint at the shoulder, a revolute
joint at the elbow and a spherical joint at the wrist. As a
result, each leg of this robot can be considered as of Type
(iii). Cartesian, cylindrical and SCARA robots are of Type
(iv). Spherical robots can be classied as Type (v).
TABLE I
A RCHITECTURES OF SPATIAL INDUSTRIAL ROBOTS .
Type Trunk Shoulder Elbow Comment
(i): RR R R R Last two Rs are parallel
(ii): RRR R RR R Last two Rs are parallel
(iii): SR R S R Joint axes are not
parallel or perpendicular
(iv): PP R P P Two Ps are perpendicular
(v): RRP R R RP Last two Rs are parallel
(vi): RRP R R RP Last two Rs are not parallel
In all these examples, the rst joint does not affect gravity
balancing of the robot, since its axis is parallel to the gravity
vector. Therefore, the rst link need not be considered in
the gravity balancing of the robot. Our approach to gravity
balancing is based on two steps: (i) locate the center of mass
2872
Fig. 1. A schematic of the RSR (revolute, spherical, revolute) robot with
frame assignment
of distal segments of the robot using auxiliary parallelograms;
(ii) select springs to connect to the center of mass such that
the total potential energy of the system is invariant with
conguration. This approach will be applied to the classes
of robots described in Table 1. The gravity balancing designs
are described in detail in this paper.
II. B ALANCING OF R OBOTS WITH R JOINTS
Consider a spatial robot shown in Fig. 1. The axis of the
rst joint, i.e., the trunk, is along the gravity vector z0 . Frame
F1 is assigned to link 1 at origin O1. The second joint, i.e., the
shoulder, is a spherical joint represented by three intersecting
revolute joints. The last joint, i.e., the elbow, is also a revolute
joint.
It is easy to show that the total potential energy of the
robot is independent of the rst joint angle 1 . This feature
emphasizes that the rst joint angle does not affect the gravity
balancing of the robot. Also, since point O1 is on z1 axis,
the component of the position vector rOO1 along the gravity
vector z0 , which has effect on the total potential energy, is a
constant. As a result, point O1 can be considered as a reference
point for further study on gravity balancing. Our approach to
gravity balancing is presented rst for a spatial robot with two
R joints.
A. Balancing of a robot with a trunk and two R joints
Consider a robot with two revolute joints along z1 and z2
following a trunk motion, respectively shown in Fig.2(a). Here,
the axes of the joints are not parallel. Points O1, O2 and O3
are the origins of rst, second and third frames. Joint variables
are the joint angles 2 and 3 . The nonzero DH parameters of
the robot are a2, d3 and a3. Please note that we reserve link
1 for the trunk and according to DH convention, 1 for the
joint angle of the trunk along the gravity vector z0 . First, we
locate the COM of the robot using auxiliary parallelograms.
Next, we add appropriate springs to the robot to make the total
gravitational and springs potential energy to be conguration
invariant.
2873
Fig. 2. (a) A schematic of the gravity balanced RR robot with the springs,
(b) Connection points of spring k1
1) Location of COM: The COM of the two links can be
written with respect to point O1 as
1
rO1 C = (m2 rO1 C2 + m3 rO1 C3 ), (1)
m
where m2 and m3 are the masses of link 2 and 3, respectively,
and m = m2 +m3 . Also, rO1 C2 and rO1 C3 are position vectors
of the COM of links 2 and 3 from point O1. Here, it is assumed
that the COM of a link i is located in its local xi zi plane. Upon
substitution of rO1 C2 and rO1 C3 into Eq.(1), rO1 C is given by
rO1 C = $1 x2 + $2 z2 + $3 x3, (2)
where $i , i = 1, 2, 3 are functions of geometric, inertia and DH
parameters of the links [2]. The COM of the these two links
can be physically located by using auxiliary parallelograms as
shown in Fig.2(a).
2) Springs Selection: In order to make the system of two
links gravity-balanced, we need to add springs such that the
total potential energy consisting of gravitation and springs
becomes invariant with conguration.
The potential energy due to gravity is written as
Vg = mg rO1 C . (3)
Upon substitution of Eqs. (2) and g = gz0 into Eq. (3), one
obtains
Vg = mg($1 z0 x2 + $2 z0 z2 + $3 z0 x3 ). (4)
With further analysis, one can show that one spring needs to be
connected between the COM of the system and a xed point
on an axis parallel to gravity vector, i.e., z0, passing through
O1 to compensate for the gravitational potential energy of the
system as shown in Fig. 2(a). The potential energy due to the
spring can be written as
1
Vs = krP C rP C . (5)
2
Here, rP C = rO1 C rO1 P , where rO1 P = h0z0 .
In this study, it is assumed that the undeformed length of
the spring is zero. In the physical implementation of zero free
length spring, a nonzero free length spring can be used with
a pulley, such that spring force is transmitted through a wire
[12].
Upon substitution of Eq. (2) into Eq. (5), one obtains Fig. 3. (a) A schematic of a PP robot, (b) Gravity balanced PP robot with
all springs
Vs = kh0 ($1z0 x2 + $2z0 z2 + $3 z0 x3) +
1
k($21 + $22 + $23 + h20 + 2$1 $3x2 x3 ). (6)
2
The total potential energy comprising gravitation and spring III. G RAVITY B ALANCING OF R OBOTS WITH P JOINTS
can be written using Eqs.(4) and (6) In this section, the gravity balancing of robots with prismatic
V = Vg + Vs joints is considered. First, we consider the robot with PP
architecture, i.e., Type (iv) of Table 1. Here, the rst joint axis
= (mg kh0 )($1z0 x2 + $2z0 z2 + $3 z0 x3) +
is along the gravity vector and the axes of two prismatic joints
1
k($21 + $22 + $23 + h20 + 2$1$3x2 x3 ). (7) are perpendicular. Next, we consider the RRP architecture,
2
namely, types (v) and (vi) of Table 1. Since we have shown
The rst term in the parenthesis in V is conguration de- in previous section that the rst joint does not affect gravity
pendent but vanishes when k = mg h0 . The only conguration balancing of the robot, we will not consider the rst joint in
variable term in V is Vvar = k$1 $3 x2 x3 . To compensate our gravity balancing of robots with prismatic joints.
for the conguration variable term Vvar , we add a spring with
stiffness k1 between the links along x2 and x3 axes shown in A. Type(iv): PP Architecture
Fig. 2(b). Here, d1 and d2 are the connection points of spring
Consider a PP robot as shown in Fig. 3(a). d2 and d3 are
k1. The total potential energy due to spring k1 and Vvar is
joint variables for links 2 and 3, respectively. m2 and l2 are
1
V = Vvar + k1 x21 (8) the mass and length of the moving part of link 2 and m3 is
2 the mass of link 3. The joint axis of the second link is along
1 2 2 z1 and parallel to gravity vector g = gz0 . The location of
= k$1$3 x2 x3 k1 d1d2 x2 x3 + k1(d1 + d2),
2 COM of two links is written as
where x1 is the extension of spring k1. V becomes congu-
ration invariant when k1 = k$ 1 $3 rOC = rOS + rSC = (d2 + $1)z1 + $2z2 , (9)
d1 d2 . Hence, the two-link robot
becomes gravity balanced by adding two springs k and k1 where $1 = m2 l2cm+m3 l2 and $2 = mm 3 l3c
with m = m2 + m3 .
shown in Fig. 2. Here, l2c is the COM of the moving part of link 2 from point
B. Balancing of Types (i), (ii) and (iii) Robots O1 and l3c is the COM of link 3 from point O2 which is a
The Type (i) of Table 1, namely, RR, is a special case of function of joint variable d3. Hence, $2 is a function of variable
the robots with two Rs explained in Section II-A where the d3. The potential energy of the robot due to the gravity can
two joint axes of Rs are parallel. Hence, it can be balanced be written as
using the same method described in Section II-A. Please note Vg = mg rOC = mg(d2 + $1 ). (10)
that the reference point O1 is at the shoulder for Type (i).
The Type (ii) of Table 1, i.e., RRR has an extra R at the The joint axis of the third link, i.e., z2 is perpendicular to the
shoulder compared to Type (i). Since our reference point for gravity vector. As a result, the second term in rOC , i.e., $2z2
gravity balancing is at the shoulder point O1, this extra R does does not have any contribution to the gravitational potential
not affect gravity balancing of the robot. energy. To compensate for the variable term in Vg , we add the
Finally, Type (iii) has spherical joint at the shoulder point following two springs k and k1 as shown in Fig. 3(b): (i) one
O1 instead of revolute joint in the robot with two Rs in spring k from point S to a point P . Point P is a xed point
Section II-A. The spherical joint at the reference point O1 located at an arbitrary distance h0 above the base. Please note
does not affect the gravity balancing of the robot. Therefore, that spring k is connected to point S instead of system COM
balancing procedure explained in Section II-A can be used for because rOS term in rOC affects the gravitational potential
Types (ii) and (iii) as well. energy, (ii) one spring k1 on the diagonal of a moving rhombus

2874
Fig. 4. (a) A cylindrical robot with RPP architecture. (b) A SCARA robot
with RRP architecture.

of side a with the other diagonal as d2 [13]. The total potential

energy of the robot due to the gravity and springs becomes
1
V = Vg + Vk + Vk1 = mg(d2 + $1) + k(b20 +
2
1 Fig. 5.
(h0 (d2 + $1 )) ) + k1(4a d22).
2 2
(11)
2
Here, a, b0 and h0 are constants as shown in Fig. 3(b). Eq.(11)
can be rewritten in terms of variable terms as
1
V = (mg k(h0 $1))d2 + (k k1)d22 + mg$1 +
2 respectively, while $1 and $2 = $21 +$22 d4 are given in terms
1 2
k(b + h0 + $1) + 2k1a2 kh0$1.
2 2
(12)
2 0
The rst two terms of Eq.(12) vary with conguration. If we
assume k = h0mg $1 and k1 = k, the total potential energy of
the system is conguration invariant and hence the robot is
gravity balanced. To have k > 0, the parameter h0 is chosen
greater than $1.
A cylindrical robot has a RPP architecture as shown in
Fig. 4(a). In Cartesian robot with PPP architecture, the axes of
the last prismatic joint is perpendicular to the gravity vector
and thus its motion does not affect gravitational potential
energy. SCARA robot has RRP structure as shown in Fig. 4(b).
The rst two revolute joint axes are parallel to gravity vector
and thus do not affect gravity balancing. The prismatic joint
axis is parallel to gravity vector. As a result, only the pris-
matic joint of SCARA robot should be considered for gravity
balancing. Hence, all these industrial robots can be gravity
balanced using the method described in this section.
B. Type (v): RRP Architecture
Here, consider axes of the two revolute joints to be parallel
but not along the gravity vector as shown in Fig 5. The joint
variables are 2 and 3 for the second and third links and d4
for the fourth link. Link 3 is only a revolute joint with zero
mass and length.
1) Location of the COM: The location of COM of the robot
can be written as
rO1 C = $1 x2 + $2 z3 .
A schematic of the RRP robot with geometric parameters
Here, x2 and z3 are unit vectors along links 2 and 4,
of geometry and inertia of the links as
m2 lc2
$1 = , (14)
m
m41 lc41 + m42lc42
$21 = , (15)
m
m42
$22 = . (16)
m
where m2 is the mass of link 2 and lc2 is the location of COM
of link 2 from point O1. Also m41 and m42 are the masses
of the two parts of link 4 while lc41 and lc42 are the COM of
the two parts of link 4 shown in Fig 5.
To physically locate the COM of the robot, we should rst
have $1 and $2 in Eq.(13). The length $2 is a function of
variable d4 and can be located by a mechanism using similar
triangles as shown in Fig. 6. By varying the prismatic joint
parameter d4, the auxiliary link O3 N is rotated about the
revolute joint at O3 such that the length $2 is varied linearly
with respect to d4. Hence, this similar triangle mechanism
locates $2 in terms of d4 using $2 = $21 +$22d4. Next, having
$1 and $2, the COM of the robot can be determined using
extensible auxiliary parallelogram shown in Fig 7.
2) Springs selection: The gravitational potential energy of
the robot can be written as
Vg = mg rO1 C . (17)
Upon substitution of g = gy1 and Eq.(13) into Vg , one gets
(13) Vg = mg($1 s2 + $2s23 ), (18)

2875
 potential energy V is written as

V = mg($1 s2 + $2s23 ) k1h0 ($1s2 + $2s23 ) +

1
k1(h20 + $21 + $22 + 2$1 $2c3 ), (22)
2
where c3 stands for cos 3 .
The rst two parentheses in V vanish by assuming k1 =
mg
h0 . As a result, the only conguration variable terms in V is

1
Vvar = k1($22 + 2$1$2c3 ). (23)
2
Fig. 6. A schematic of a similar triangle mechanism
We can add the following springs to compensate for the
variable terms in Vvar : (i) a spring k2 to take care of the
second term in Vvar , (ii) a second spring k3 on the diagonal
of a moving rhombus with side a and the other diagonal as
$2 to vanish the rst term of Vvar . These springs are shown
in Fig. 9(b).
The total potential energy of these two springs and Vvar is

1 1
V = k1($22 + 2$1 $2c3 ) + k2((l1 $1 )2 +
2 2
1
$2 2(l1 $1)$2 c3 ) + k3(4a2 $22).
2
(24)
2
Eq.(24) can be rewritten as

1
V = (k1 + k2 k3 )$22 + (k1$1 k2 (l1 $1 ))$2c3
2
Fig. 7. Location of COM of the RRP robot 1
+ k1$22 + 2k3a2. (25)
2

If we assume k2 = lk1 1$
$1
1
and k3 = k1 +k2, all conguration
variable terms in V vanish. As a result, the RRP robot is
where s2 and s23 stand for sin (2 ) and sin (2 + 3 ), respec- gravity balanced by using three springs. A spherical robot has
tively with 3 = 3 /2, as shown in Fig. 5.
We add a spring with stiffness k1 from robot COM, i.e.,
point C to point P vertically above point O1 along the gravity
vector shown in Fig. 9(a). The total potential energy due to
gravity and spring is given

V = Vg + Vk1 . (19)

The potential energy due to the spring k1 is written as

1 2
Vk1 = k1 P C , (20)
2


where P C = O1 C O1P .

Upon substitution of O1P = h0y1 and Eq.(13) into Vk1 and Fig. 8. A spherical robot with RRP architecture.
simplifying, the result thus obtained is
1
Vk 1 = k1(h20 + $21 +
2
$22 2h0$1 s2 2h0$2s23 + 2$1$2c3 ). (21) RRP architecture as shown in Fig. 8. The rst revolute joint
axis is parallel to gravity vector. Hence, spherical robots are
Upon substitution of Eqs.(18) and (21) into Eq. (19), the total a subclass of RRP structure studied in this section.

2876
Fig. 9. (a) A schematic of the RRP robot with the attachment of spring k1
(b) Gravity balanced robot with all springs
C. Type (vi): RRP Spatial Architecture
Consider a robot with RRP architecture where the rst two
Rs are not parallel as shown in Fig. 10. Here, 2 , 3 and d3
are the joint variables of the robot. Joint axes z1 and z2 are
not parallel. This robot has the same architecture as the one
presented in Section II-A with an extra prismatic joint with
variable d3. Using the balancing method presented in Section
II-A for the rst two Rs and the one presented in Section III-B
for the prismatic joint, it is possible to show that this robot is
gravity balanced using three springs k1, k2 and k3 with the
following stiffness:
mg
k1 = , (26)
h0
$1 $3
k2 = , (27)
d1 d2
k3 = k1 , (28)
where $1 and $3 are as dened in Section II-A.1 and h0 is the
distance of O1 P along the gravity vector. Also, d1 and d2 are
the connection points of spring k2 .
IV. C ONCLUSION
The previous methods of gravity balancing of industrial
robots presented in the literature are limited to a specic
architecture of an industrial robot. In this paper, we presented
a method to gravity balance classes of industrial robots with
anthropomorphic design, namely, as a concatenation of revo-
lute, prismatic and spherical joints. Our approach to gravity
balancing is based on two steps: (i) locate the center of mass
of distal segments of the robot using auxiliary parallelograms;
(ii) select springs to connect to the center of mass such that
the total potential energy of the system is invariant with
conguration. The gravity balancing designs were described
in detail for different architectures of spatial industrial robots
with prismatic and revolute joints.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The support of NIH grant # 1 RO1 HD38582-01A2 is
gratefully acknowledged.
2877
Fig. 10. A schematic of gravity balanced spatial RRP robot with all springs
R EFERENCES
[1] Ulrich, N. and Kumar, V., Passive Mechanical Gravity Compensation
for Robot Manipulators, Proc. of IEEE Int. Conf. on Robotics and
Automation, pp. 1536-1541, 1991.
[2] Agrawal, S. K. and Fattah A., Gravity-balancing of Spatial Robotic
Manipulators, Mechanisms and Machine Theory, Vol. 39, pp. 1331-1344,
2004.
[3] Arakelian, V. H. and Smith, M. R., Complete Shaking Force and Shaking
Moment Balancing of Linkages, Mechanisms and Machine Theory, Vol.
34, pp. 1141-1153, 1999.
[4] Wang, J. and Gosselin, C. M., Static Balancing of Spatial Four-degree-
of-freedom Parallel Mechanisms, Mechanisms and Machine Theory, Vol.
35, pp. 563-592, 2000.
[5] Rahman, T., Ramanathan, R., Seliktar, R. and Harwin, W., A Simple
Technique to Passively Gravity-Balance Articulated Mechanisms, Jour-
nal of Mechanical Design, Vol. 117, pp. 655-658, 1995.
[6] Agrawal, S. K., Gardner, G., and Pledgie, S., Design and Fabrication of
a Gravity Balanced Planar Mechanism Using Auxiliary Parallelograms,
Journal of Mechanical Design, Transactions of the ASME, Vol. 123, No.
4, pp. 525-528, 2001.
[7] Diken, H., Effect of Mass Balancing on the Actuator Torques of a
Manipulator, Mech. and Mach. Theory, Vol. 30, pp. 495-500, 1995.
[8] Segla, S., Kalker-Kalkman C.M. and Schwab, A.L., Statical Balancing
of a Robot Mechanism with the aid of a Genetic Algorithm, Mechanisms
and Machine Theory, Vol. 33, pp. 163-174, 1998.
[9] Simionescu, I., Ciupitu, L., The Static Balancing of the Industrial Robot
Arms Part I: Discrete Balancing, Mechanisms and Machine Theory, Vol.
35, pp. 1287-1298, 2000.
[10] Simionescu, I., Ciupitu, L., The Static Balancing of the Industrial Robot
Arms Part II: Continuous Balancing, Mechanisms and Machine Theory,
Vol. 35, pp. 1299-1311, 2000.
[11] Tsai, L. W., Robot Analysis: The Mechanics of Serial and Parallel Ma-
nipulators, Wiley-Interscience Publication, John Wiley and Sons, 1999.
[12] Streit, D.A., and Gilmore, B.J., Perfect Spring Equilibrators for Ro-
tatable Bodies, ASME Journal of Mechanisms, Transmissions, and
Automation in Design, Vol. 111, No. 4, pp. 451-458, 1989.
[13] Streit, D. A. and Shin. E., Equilibrators for Planar Linkages, Journal of
Mechanical Design, Transactions of the ASME, Vol. 115, No. 3, pp. 604-
610, 1993.