Development of a novel autonomous robot for navigation and inspect in oil wells

This paper proposes a novel robotic system that is able to move along the outside of the oil pipelines used in Electric Submersible Pumps (ESP) and Progressive Cavity Pumps (PCP) applications. This novel design, called RETOV, proposes a light weight structure robot that can be equipped with sensors to measure environmental variables avoiding damage in pumps and wells. In this paper, the main considerations and methodology of design and implementation are discussed. Finally, the first experimental results that show RETOV moving in vertical pipelines are analyzed.

Non invasive moisture measurement in agricultural fiel using a rolling spherical robot

Irrigation management in large crop fields is a very important practice. Since the farm management costs and the crop results are directly connected with the environmental moisture, water control optimization is a critical factor for agricultural practices, as well as for the planet sustainability. Usually, the crop humidity is measured through the water stress index (WSI), using imagery acquired from satellites or airplanes. Nevertheless, these tools have a significant cost, lack from availability, and dependability from the weather. Other alternative is to recover to ground tools, such as ground vehicles and even static base stations. However, they have an outstanding impact in the farming process, since they can damage the cultivation and require more human effort. As a possible solution to these issues, a rolling ground robot have been designed and developed, enabling non-invasive measurements within crop fields. This paper addresses the spherical robot system applied to intra-crop moisture measurements. Furthermore, some experiments were carried out in an early stage corn field in order to build a geo-referenced WSI map.

Adaptive control system based on lineal control theory for the path-following problem of a car-like mobile robot

The objective of this paper is to design a path following control system for a car-like mobile robot using classical linear control techniques, so that it adapts on-line to varying conditions during the trajectory following task. The main advantages of the proposed control structure is that well known linear control theory can be applied in calculating the PID controllers to full control requirements, while at the same time it is exible to be applied in non-linear changing conditions of the path following task. For this purpose the Frenet frame kinematic model of the robot is linearised at a varying working point that is calculated as a function of the actual velocity, the path curvature and kinematic parameters of the robot, yielding a transfer function that varies during the trajectory. The proposed controller is formed by a combination of an adaptive PID and a feed-forward controller, which varies accordingly with the working conditions and compensates the non-linearity of the system. The good features and exibility of the proposed control structure have been demonstrated through realistic simulations that include both kinematics and dynamics of the car-like robot.

Decentralized multi-tasks distribution in heterogeneous robot teams by means of ant colony optimization and learning automata

This paper focuses on the general problem of coordinating multiple robots. More specifically, it addresses the self-election of heterogeneous specialized tasks by autonomous robots. In this paper we focus on a specifically distributed or decentralized approach as we are particularly interested on decentralized solution where the robots themselves autonomously and in an individual manner, are responsible of selecting a particular task so that all the existing tasks are optimally distributed and executed. In this regard, we have established an experimental scenario to solve the corresponding multi-tasks distribution problem and we propose a solution using two different approaches by applying Ant Colony Optimization-based deterministic algorithms as well as Learning Automata-based probabilistic algorithms. We have evaluated the robustness of the algorithm, perturbing the number of pending loads to simulate the robot’s error in estimating the real number of pending tasks and also the dynamic generation of loads through time. The paper ends with a critical discussion of experimental results.

Application of self-organizing techniques for the distribution of heterogeneous multi-tasks in multi-robot systems

This paper focuses on the general problem of coordinating of multi-robot systems, more specifically, it addresses the self-election of heterogeneous and specialized tasks by autonomous robots. In this regard, it has proposed experimenting with two different techniques based chiefly on selforganization and emergence biologically inspired, by applying response threshold models as well as ant colony optimization. Under this approach it can speak of multi-tasks selection instead of multi-tasks allocation, that means, as the agents or robots select the tasks instead of being assigned a task by a central controller. The key element in these algorithms is the estimation of the stimuli and the adaptive update of the thresholds. This means that each robot performs this estimate locally depending on the load or the number of pending tasks to be performed. It has evaluated the robustness of the algorithms, perturbing the number of pending loads to simulate the robot’s error in estimating the real number of pending tasks and also the dynamic generation of loads through time. The paper ends with a critical discussion of experimental results.

Response threshold models and stochastic learning automata for self-coordination of heterogeneous multi-task distribution in multi-robot systems.

This paper focuses on the general problem of coordinating multiple robots. More specifically, it addresses the self-selection of heterogeneous specialized tasks by autonomous robots. In this paper we focus on a specifically distributed or decentralized approach as we are particularly interested in a decentralized solution where the robots themselves autonomously and in an individual manner, are responsible for selecting a particular task so that all the existing tasks are optimally distributed and executed. In this regard, we have established an experimental scenario to solve the corresponding multi-task distribution problem and we propose a solution using two different approaches by applying Response Threshold Models as well as Learning Automata-based probabilistic algorithms. We have evaluated the robustness of the algorithms, perturbing the number of pending loads to simulate the robot’s error in estimating the real number of pending tasks and also the dynamic generation of loads through time. The paper ends with a critical discussion of experimental results.

VladBot. Robot para posicionamiento de medida

VladBot es un robot autónomo diseñado para posicionar en interiores un micrófono de medida. Este prototipo puede valorar la idea de automatizar medidas acústicas en interiores mediante un robot autónomo. Posee dos ruedas motrices y una rueda loca. Ésta rueda loca aporta maniobrabilidad al robot. Un soporte extensible hecho de aluminio sostiene el micrófono de medida. VladBot ha sido diseñado con tecnologías de bajo coste y bajo una plataforma abierta, Arduino. Arduino es una plataforma electrónica libre. Esto quiere decir que los usuarios tienen libre acceso a toda la información referente a los micro-controladores (hardware) y referente al software. Ofrece un IDE (Integrated Development Environment, en español, Entorno de Desarrollo Integrado) de forma gratuita y con un sencillo lenguaje de programación, con el que se pueden realizar proyectos de cualquier tipo. Además, los usuarios disponen de un foro donde encontrar ayuda, “Arduino Forum”. VladBot se comunica con el usuario a través de Bluetooth, creando un enlace fiable y con un alcance suficiente (aproximadamente 100 metros) para que controlar a VladBot desde una sala contigua. Hoy en día, Bluetooth es una tecnología implantada en casi todos los ordenadores, por lo que no necesario ningún sistema adicional para crear dicho enlace. Esta comunicación utiliza un protocolo de comunicaciones, JSON (JavaScript Object Notation). JSON hace que la comunicación sea más fiable, ya que sólo un tipo de mensajes preestablecidos son reconocidos. Gracias a este protocolo es posible la comunicación con otro software, permitiendo crear itinerarios en otro programa externo. El diseño de VladBot favorece su evolución hasta un sistema más preciso ya que el usuario puede realizar modificaciones en el robot. El código que se proporciona puede ser modificado, aumentando las funcionalidades de VladBot o mejorándolas. Sus componentes pueden ser cambiados también (incluso añadir nuevos dispositivos) para aumentar sus capacidades. Vladbot es por tanto, un sistema de transporte (de bajo coste) para un micrófono de medida que se puede comunicar inalámbricamente con el usuario de manera fiable. ABSTRACT. VladBot is an autonomous robot designed to indoor positioning of a measurement microphone. This prototype can value the idea of making automatic acoustic measurements indoor with an autonomous robot. It has two drive wheels and a caster ball. This caster ball provides manoeuvrability to the robot. An extendible stand made in aluminium holds the measurement microphone. VladBot has been designed with low cost technologies and under an open-source platform, Arduino. Arduino is a freeFsource electronics platform. This means that users have free access to all the information about micro-controllers (hardware) and about the software. Arduino offers a free IDE (Integrated Development Environment) with an easy programming language, which any kind of project can be made with. Besides, users have a forum where find help, “Arduino Forum”. VladBot communicates with the user by Bluetooth, creating a reliable link with enough range (100 meters approximately) for controlling VladBot in the next room. Nowadays, Bluetooth is a technology embedded in almost laptops, so it is not necessary any additional system for create this link. This communication uses a communication protocol, JSON (JavaScript Object Notation). JSON makes the communication more reliable, since only a preFestablished kind of messages are recognised. Thanks to this protocol is possible the communication with another software, allowing to create routes in an external program. VladBot´s design favours its evolution to an accurate system since the user can make modifications in the robot. The code given can be changed, increasing VladBot´s uses or improving these uses. Their components can be changed too (even new devices can be added) for increasing its abilities. So, VladBot is a (low cost) transport system for a measurement microphone, which can communicate with the user in a reliable way.

An Inexpensive Method for Kinematic Calibration of a Parallel Robot by Using One Hand-Held Camera as Main Sensor

This paper presents a novel method for the calibration of a parallel robot, which allows a more accurate configuration instead of a configuration based on nominal parameters. It is used, as the main sensor with one camera installed in the robot hand that determines the relative position of the robot with respect to a spherical object fixed in the working area of the robot. The positions of the end effector are related to the incremental positions of resolvers of the robot motors. A kinematic model of the robot is used to find a new group of parameters, which minimizes errors in the kinematic equations. Additionally, properties of the spherical object and intrinsic camera parameters are utilized to model the projection of the object in the image and thereby improve spatial measurements. Finally, several working tests, static and tracking tests are executed in order to verify how the robotic system behaviour improves by using calibrated parameters against nominal parameters. In order to emphasize that, this proposed new method uses neither external nor expensive sensor. That is why new robots are useful in teaching and research activities.

Diseño e implementación de robot prototipo para la inspección de tuberías en pozos petroleros (bombas de cavidad progresiva y bombas electro sumergibles)

En este trabajo se presenta el desarrollo de un robot basado en la estructura tensegrity con el fin de realizar tareas de inspección y mantenimiento en tuberías petroleras. Debido a la naturaleza de la aplicación, el robot debe ser capaz de desplazarse verticalmente por el exterior de una dicha tubería. Este tipo de estructura mecánica se caracteriza por su bajo peso y su alta capacidad de adaptación a los diferentes diámetros. La aplicación requiere que el dispositivo desarrollado se desplace a alta velocidad por las tuberías utilizadas en la extracción del petróleo. Cabe destacar que en dichas instalaciones se cuenta con Bombas Electro Sumergibles (BES) y Bombas de Cavidad Progresiva (BCP), ambas muy sensibles a las condiciones adversas del entorno. Consecuentemente se prevé que el robot incorpore una red de sensores específicos para medir aquellas variables que puedan interferir en el funcionamiento normal de las bombas. En este artículo se describen detalladamente las hipótesis de diseño realizadas y la metodología utilizada para el desarrollo del primer prototipo. Finalmente se presentan los resultados obtenidos de dicho desarrollo a través de los cuales se ha podido validar la potencialidad de la aplicación.

Force sensor of a climbing robot derived from its own flexible structure

One of the most important design constraints of a climbing robot is its own weight. When links or legs are used as a locomotion system they tend to be composed of special lightweight materials, or four-bars-linkage mechanisms are designed to reduce the weight with small rigidity looses. In these cases, flexibility appears and undesirable effects, such as dynamics vibrations, must be avoided at least when the robot moves at low speeds. The knowledge of the real tip position requires the computation of its compliance or stiffness matrix and the external forces applied to the structure. Gravitational forces can be estimated, but external tip forces need to be measured. This paper proposes a strain gauge system which achieves the following tasks: (i) measurement of the external tip forces, and (ii) estimation of the real tip position (including flexibility effects). The main advantages of the proposed system are: (a) the use of external force sensors is avoided, and (b) a substantial reduction of the robot weight is achieved in comparison with other external force measurement systems. The proposed method is applied to a real symmetric climbing robot and experimental results are presented.

Robust control of underactuated wheeled mobile manipulators using GPI disturbance observers

This article describes the design of a linear observer–linear controller-based robust output feedback scheme for output reference trajectory tracking tasks in the case of nonlinear, multivariable, nonholonomic underactuated mobile manipulators. The proposed linear feedback scheme is based on the use of a classical linear feedback controller and suitably extended, high-gain, linear Generalized Proportional Integral (GPI) observers, thus aiding the linear feedback controllers to provide an accurate simultaneous estimation of each flat output associated phase variables and of the exogenous and perturbation inputs. This information is used in the proposed feedback controller in (a) approximate, yet close, cancelations, as lumped unstructured time-varying terms, of the influence of the highly coupled nonlinearities, and (b) the devising of proper linear output feedback control laws based on the approximate estimates of the string of phase variables associated with the flat outputs simultaneously provided by the disturbance observers. Simulations reveal the effectiveness of the proposed approach.

Decision-Making Mechanism to Organize the Agenda of a Guide-Robot

One of the major challenges in evolutionary robotics is constituted by the need of the robot being able to make decisions on its own, in accordance with the multiple tasks programmed, optimizing its timings and power. In this paper, we present a new automatic decision making mechanism for a robot guide that allows the robot to make the best choice in order to reach its aims, performing its tasks in an optimal way. The election of which is the best alternative is based on a series of criteria and restrictions of the tasks to perform. The software developed in the project has been verified on the tour-guide robot Urbano. The most important aspect of this proposal is that the design uses learning as the means to optimize the quality in the decision making. The modeling of the quality index of the best choice to perform is made using fuzzy logic and it represents the beliefs of the robot, which continue to evolve in order to match the "external reality”. This fuzzy system is used to select the most appropriate set of tasks to perform during the day. With this tool, the tour guide-robot prepares its agenda daily, which satisfies the objectives and restrictions, and it identifies the best task to perform at each moment. This work is part of the ARABOT project of the Intelligent Control Research Group at the Universidad Politécnica de Madrid to create "awareness" in a robot guide.

Inverse kinematics of a humanoid robot with non-spherical hip: a hybrid algorithm approach

This paper describes an approach to solve the inverse kinematics problem of humanoid robots whose construction shows a small but non negligible offset at the hip which prevents any purely analytical solution to be developed. Knowing that a purely numerical solution is not feasible due to variable efficiency problems, the proposed one first neglects the offset presence in order to obtain an approximate “solution” by means of an analytical algorithm based on screw theory, and then uses it as the initial condition of a numerical refining procedure based on the Levenberg‐Marquardt algorithm. In this way, few iterations are needed for any specified attitude, making it possible to implement the algorithm for real‐time applications. As a way to show the algorithm’s implementation, one case of study is considered throughout the paper, represented by the SILO2 humanoid robot.

Caracterización de un robot para aplicaciones de mecanizado con requerimientos de tolerancias

El presente Trabajo fin Fin de Máster, versa sobre una caracterización preliminar del comportamiento de un robot de tipo industrial, configurado por 4 eslabones y 4 grados de libertad, y sometido a fuerzas de mecanizado en su extremo. El entorno de trabajo planteado es el de plantas de fabricación de piezas de aleaciones de aluminio para automoción. Este tipo de componentes parte de un primer proceso de fundición que saca la pieza en bruto. Para series medias y altas, en función de las propiedades mecánicas y plásticas requeridas y los costes de producción, la inyección a alta presión (HPDC) y la fundición a baja presión (LPC) son las dos tecnologías más usadas en esta primera fase. Para inyección a alta presión, las aleaciones de aluminio más empleadas son, en designación simbólica según norma EN 1706 (entre paréntesis su designación numérica); EN AC AlSi9Cu3(Fe) (EN AC 46000) , EN AC AlSi9Cu3(Fe)(Zn) (EN AC 46500), y EN AC AlSi12Cu1(Fe) (EN AC 47100). Para baja presión, EN AC AlSi7Mg0,3 (EN AC 42100). En los 3 primeros casos, los límites de Silicio permitidos pueden superan el 10%. En el cuarto caso, es inferior al 10% por lo que, a los efectos de ser sometidas a mecanizados, las piezas fabricadas en aleaciones con Si superior al 10%, se puede considerar que son equivalentes, diferenciándolas de la cuarta. Las tolerancias geométricas y dimensionales conseguibles directamente de fundición, recogidas en normas como ISO 8062 o DIN 1688-1, establecen límites para este proceso. Fuera de esos límites, las garantías en conseguir producciones con los objetivos de ppms aceptados en la actualidad por el mercado, obligan a ir a fases posteriores de mecanizado. Aquellas geometrías que, funcionalmente, necesitan disponer de unas tolerancias geométricas y/o dimensionales definidas acorde a ISO 1101, y no capaces por este proceso inicial de moldeado a presión, deben ser procesadas en una fase posterior en células de mecanizado. En este caso, las tolerancias alcanzables para procesos de arranque de viruta se recogen en normas como ISO 2768. Las células de mecanizado se componen, por lo general, de varios centros de control numérico interrelacionados y comunicados entre sí por robots que manipulan las piezas en proceso de uno a otro. Dichos robots, disponen en su extremo de una pinza utillada para poder coger y soltar las piezas en los útiles de mecanizado, las mesas de intercambio para cambiar la pieza de posición o en utillajes de equipos de medición y prueba, o en cintas de entrada o salida. La repetibilidad es alta, de centésimas incluso, definida según norma ISO 9283. El problema es que, estos rangos de repetibilidad sólo se garantizan si no se hacen esfuerzos o éstos son despreciables (caso de mover piezas). Aunque las inercias de mover piezas a altas velocidades hacen que la trayectoria intermedia tenga poca precisión, al inicio y al final (al coger y dejar pieza, p.e.) se hacen a velocidades relativamente bajas que hacen que el efecto de las fuerzas de inercia sean menores y que permiten garantizar la repetibilidad anteriormente indicada. No ocurre así si se quitara la garra y se intercambia con un cabezal motorizado con una herramienta como broca, mandrino, plato de cuchillas, fresas frontales o tangenciales… Las fuerzas ejercidas de mecanizado generarían unos pares en las uniones tan grandes y tan variables que el control del robot no sería capaz de responder (o no está preparado, en un principio) y generaría una desviación en la trayectoria, realizada a baja velocidad, que desencadenaría en un error de posición (ver norma ISO 5458) no asumible para la funcionalidad deseada. Se podría llegar al caso de que la tolerancia alcanzada por un pretendido proceso más exacto diera una dimensión peor que la que daría el proceso de fundición, en principio con mayor variabilidad dimensional en proceso (y por ende con mayor intervalo de tolerancia garantizable). De hecho, en los CNCs, la precisión es muy elevada, (pudiéndose despreciar en la mayoría de los casos) y no es la responsable de, por ejemplo la tolerancia de posición al taladrar un agujero. Factores como, temperatura de la sala y de la pieza, calidad constructiva de los utillajes y rigidez en el amarre, error en el giro de mesas y de colocación de pieza, si lleva agujeros previos o no, si la herramienta está bien equilibrada y el cono es el adecuado para el tipo de mecanizado… influyen más. Es interesante que, un elemento no específico tan común en una planta industrial, en el entorno anteriormente descrito, como es un robot, el cual no sería necesario añadir por disponer de él ya (y por lo tanto la inversión sería muy pequeña), puede mejorar la cadena de valor disminuyendo el costo de fabricación. Y si se pudiera conjugar que ese robot destinado a tareas de manipulación, en los muchos tiempos de espera que va a disfrutar mientras el CNC arranca viruta, pudiese coger un cabezal y apoyar ese mecanizado; sería doblemente interesante. Por lo tanto, se antoja sugestivo poder conocer su comportamiento e intentar explicar qué sería necesario para llevar esto a cabo, motivo de este trabajo. La arquitectura de robot seleccionada es de tipo SCARA. La búsqueda de un robot cómodo de modelar y de analizar cinemática y dinámicamente, sin limitaciones relevantes en la multifuncionalidad de trabajos solicitados, ha llevado a esta elección, frente a otras arquitecturas como por ejemplo los robots antropomórficos de 6 grados de libertad, muy populares a nivel industrial. Este robot dispone de 3 uniones, de las cuales 2 son de tipo par de revolución (1 grado de libertad cada una) y la tercera es de tipo corredera o par cilíndrico (2 grados de libertad). La primera unión, de tipo par de revolución, sirve para unir el suelo (considerado como eslabón número 1) con el eslabón número 2. La segunda unión, también de ese tipo, une el eslabón número 2 con el eslabón número 3. Estos 2 brazos, pueden describir un movimiento horizontal, en el plano X-Y. El tercer eslabón, está unido al eslabón número 4 por la unión de tipo corredera. El movimiento que puede describir es paralelo al eje Z. El robot es de 4 grados de libertad (4 motores). En relación a los posibles trabajos que puede realizar este tipo de robot, su versatilidad abarca tanto operaciones típicas de manipulación como operaciones de arranque de viruta. Uno de los mecanizados más usuales es el taladrado, por lo cual se elige éste para su modelización y análisis. Dentro del taladrado se elegirá para acotar las fuerzas, taladrado en macizo con broca de diámetro 9 mm. El robot se ha considerado por el momento que tenga comportamiento de sólido rígido, por ser el mayor efecto esperado el de los pares en las uniones. Para modelar el robot se utiliza el método de los sistemas multicuerpos. Dentro de este método existen diversos tipos de formulaciones (p.e. Denavit-Hartenberg). D-H genera una cantidad muy grande de ecuaciones e incógnitas. Esas incógnitas son de difícil comprensión y, para cada posición, hay que detenerse a pensar qué significado tienen. Se ha optado por la formulación de coordenadas naturales. Este sistema utiliza puntos y vectores unitarios para definir la posición de los distintos cuerpos, y permite compartir, cuando es posible y se quiere, para definir los pares cinemáticos y reducir al mismo tiempo el número de variables. Las incógnitas son intuitivas, las ecuaciones de restricción muy sencillas y se reduce considerablemente el número de ecuaciones e incógnitas. Sin embargo, las coordenadas naturales “puras” tienen 2 problemas. El primero, que 2 elementos con un ángulo de 0 o 180 grados, dan lugar a puntos singulares que pueden crear problemas en las ecuaciones de restricción y por lo tanto han de evitarse. El segundo, que tampoco inciden directamente sobre la definición o el origen de los movimientos. Por lo tanto, es muy conveniente complementar esta formulación con ángulos y distancias (coordenadas relativas). Esto da lugar a las coordenadas naturales mixtas, que es la formulación final elegida para este TFM. Las coordenadas naturales mixtas no tienen el problema de los puntos singulares. Y la ventaja más importante reside en su utilidad a la hora de aplicar fuerzas motrices, momentos o evaluar errores. Al incidir sobre la incógnita origen (ángulos o distancias) controla los motores de manera directa. El algoritmo, la simulación y la obtención de resultados se ha programado mediante Matlab. Para realizar el modelo en coordenadas naturales mixtas, es preciso modelar en 2 pasos el robot a estudio. El primer modelo se basa en coordenadas naturales. Para su validación, se plantea una trayectoria definida y se analiza cinemáticamente si el robot satisface el movimiento solicitado, manteniendo su integridad como sistema multicuerpo. Se cuantifican los puntos (en este caso inicial y final) que configuran el robot. Al tratarse de sólidos rígidos, cada eslabón queda definido por sus respectivos puntos inicial y final (que son los más interesantes para la cinemática y la dinámica) y por un vector unitario no colineal a esos 2 puntos. Los vectores unitarios se colocan en los lugares en los que se tenga un eje de rotación o cuando se desee obtener información de un ángulo. No son necesarios vectores unitarios para medir distancias. Tampoco tienen por qué coincidir los grados de libertad con el número de vectores unitarios. Las longitudes de cada eslabón quedan definidas como constantes geométricas. Se establecen las restricciones que definen la naturaleza del robot y las relaciones entre los diferentes elementos y su entorno. La trayectoria se genera por una nube de puntos continua, definidos en coordenadas independientes. Cada conjunto de coordenadas independientes define, en un instante concreto, una posición y postura de robot determinada. Para conocerla, es necesario saber qué coordenadas dependientes hay en ese instante, y se obtienen resolviendo por el método de Newton-Rhapson las ecuaciones de restricción en función de las coordenadas independientes. El motivo de hacerlo así es porque las coordenadas dependientes deben satisfacer las restricciones, cosa que no ocurre con las coordenadas independientes. Cuando la validez del modelo se ha probado (primera validación), se pasa al modelo 2. El modelo número 2, incorpora a las coordenadas naturales del modelo número 1, las coordenadas relativas en forma de ángulos en los pares de revolución (3 ángulos; ϕ1, ϕ 2 y ϕ3) y distancias en los pares prismáticos (1 distancia; s). Estas coordenadas relativas pasan a ser las nuevas coordenadas independientes (sustituyendo a las coordenadas independientes cartesianas del modelo primero, que eran coordenadas naturales). Es necesario revisar si el sistema de vectores unitarios del modelo 1 es suficiente o no. Para este caso concreto, se han necesitado añadir 1 vector unitario adicional con objeto de que los ángulos queden perfectamente determinados con las correspondientes ecuaciones de producto escalar y/o vectorial. Las restricciones habrán de ser incrementadas en, al menos, 4 ecuaciones; una por cada nueva incógnita. La validación del modelo número 2, tiene 2 fases. La primera, al igual que se hizo en el modelo número 1, a través del análisis cinemático del comportamiento con una trayectoria definida. Podrían obtenerse del modelo 2 en este análisis, velocidades y aceleraciones, pero no son necesarios. Tan sólo interesan los movimientos o desplazamientos finitos. Comprobada la coherencia de movimientos (segunda validación), se pasa a analizar cinemáticamente el comportamiento con trayectorias interpoladas. El análisis cinemático con trayectorias interpoladas, trabaja con un número mínimo de 3 puntos máster. En este caso se han elegido 3; punto inicial, punto intermedio y punto final. El número de interpolaciones con el que se actúa es de 50 interpolaciones en cada tramo (cada 2 puntos máster hay un tramo), resultando un total de 100 interpolaciones. El método de interpolación utilizado es el de splines cúbicas con condición de aceleración inicial y final constantes, que genera las coordenadas independientes de los puntos interpolados de cada tramo. Las coordenadas dependientes se obtienen resolviendo las ecuaciones de restricción no lineales con el método de Newton-Rhapson. El método de las splines cúbicas es muy continuo, por lo que si se desea modelar una trayectoria en el que haya al menos 2 movimientos claramente diferenciados, es preciso hacerlo en 2 tramos y unirlos posteriormente. Sería el caso en el que alguno de los motores se desee expresamente que esté parado durante el primer movimiento y otro distinto lo esté durante el segundo movimiento (y así sucesivamente). Obtenido el movimiento, se calculan, también mediante fórmulas de diferenciación numérica, las velocidades y aceleraciones independientes. El proceso es análogo al anteriormente explicado, recordando la condición impuesta de que la aceleración en el instante t= 0 y en instante t= final, se ha tomado como 0. Las velocidades y aceleraciones dependientes se calculan resolviendo las correspondientes derivadas de las ecuaciones de restricción. Se comprueba, de nuevo, en una tercera validación del modelo, la coherencia del movimiento interpolado. La dinámica inversa calcula, para un movimiento definido -conocidas la posición, velocidad y la aceleración en cada instante de tiempo-, y conocidas las fuerzas externas que actúan (por ejemplo el peso); qué fuerzas hay que aplicar en los motores (donde hay control) para que se obtenga el citado movimiento. En la dinámica inversa, cada instante del tiempo es independiente de los demás y tiene una posición, una velocidad y una aceleración y unas fuerzas conocidas. En este caso concreto, se desean aplicar, de momento, sólo las fuerzas debidas al peso, aunque se podrían haber incorporado fuerzas de otra naturaleza si se hubiese deseado. Las posiciones, velocidades y aceleraciones, proceden del cálculo cinemático. El efecto inercial de las fuerzas tenidas en cuenta (el peso) es calculado. Como resultado final del análisis dinámico inverso, se obtienen los pares que han de ejercer los cuatro motores para replicar el movimiento prescrito con las fuerzas que estaban actuando. La cuarta validación del modelo consiste en confirmar que el movimiento obtenido por aplicar los pares obtenidos en la dinámica inversa, coinciden con el obtenido en el análisis cinemático (movimiento teórico). Para ello, es necesario acudir a la dinámica directa. La dinámica directa se encarga de calcular el movimiento del robot, resultante de aplicar unos pares en motores y unas fuerzas en el robot. Por lo tanto, el movimiento real resultante, al no haber cambiado ninguna condición de las obtenidas en la dinámica inversa (pares de motor y fuerzas inerciales debidas al peso de los eslabones) ha de ser el mismo al movimiento teórico. Siendo así, se considera que el robot está listo para trabajar. Si se introduce una fuerza exterior de mecanizado no contemplada en la dinámica inversa y se asigna en los motores los mismos pares resultantes de la resolución del problema dinámico inverso, el movimiento real obtenido no es igual al movimiento teórico. El control de lazo cerrado se basa en ir comparando el movimiento real con el deseado e introducir las correcciones necesarias para minimizar o anular las diferencias. Se aplican ganancias en forma de correcciones en posición y/o velocidad para eliminar esas diferencias. Se evalúa el error de posición como la diferencia, en cada punto, entre el movimiento teórico deseado en el análisis cinemático y el movimiento real obtenido para cada fuerza de mecanizado y una ganancia concreta. Finalmente, se mapea el error de posición obtenido para cada fuerza de mecanizado y las diferentes ganancias previstas, graficando la mejor precisión que puede dar el robot para cada operación que se le requiere, y en qué condiciones. -------------- This Master´s Thesis deals with a preliminary characterization of the behaviour for an industrial robot, configured with 4 elements and 4 degrees of freedoms, and subjected to machining forces at its end. Proposed working conditions are those typical from manufacturing plants with aluminium alloys for automotive industry. This type of components comes from a first casting process that produces rough parts. For medium and high volumes, high pressure die casting (HPDC) and low pressure die casting (LPC) are the most used technologies in this first phase. For high pressure die casting processes, most used aluminium alloys are, in simbolic designation according EN 1706 standard (between brackets, its numerical designation); EN AC AlSi9Cu3(Fe) (EN AC 46000) , EN AC AlSi9Cu3(Fe)(Zn) (EN AC 46500), y EN AC AlSi12Cu1(Fe) (EN AC 47100). For low pressure, EN AC AlSi7Mg0,3 (EN AC 42100). For the 3 first alloys, Si allowed limits can exceed 10% content. Fourth alloy has admisible limits under 10% Si. That means, from the point of view of machining, that components made of alloys with Si content above 10% can be considered as equivalent, and the fourth one must be studied separately. Geometrical and dimensional tolerances directly achievables from casting, gathered in standards such as ISO 8062 or DIN 1688-1, establish a limit for this process. Out from those limits, guarantees to achieve batches with objetive ppms currently accepted by market, force to go to subsequent machining process. Those geometries that functionally require a geometrical and/or dimensional tolerance defined according ISO 1101, not capable with initial moulding process, must be obtained afterwards in a machining phase with machining cells. In this case, tolerances achievables with cutting processes are gathered in standards such as ISO 2768. In general terms, machining cells contain several CNCs that they are interrelated and connected by robots that handle parts in process among them. Those robots have at their end a gripper in order to take/remove parts in machining fixtures, in interchange tables to modify position of part, in measurement and control tooling devices, or in entrance/exit conveyors. Repeatibility for robot is tight, even few hundredths of mm, defined according ISO 9283. Problem is like this; those repeatibilty ranks are only guaranteed when there are no stresses or they are not significant (f.e. due to only movement of parts). Although inertias due to moving parts at a high speed make that intermediate paths have little accuracy, at the beginning and at the end of trajectories (f.e, when picking part or leaving it) movement is made with very slow speeds that make lower the effect of inertias forces and allow to achieve repeatibility before mentioned. It does not happens the same if gripper is removed and it is exchanged by an spindle with a machining tool such as a drilling tool, a pcd boring tool, a face or a tangential milling cutter… Forces due to machining would create such big and variable torques in joints that control from the robot would not be able to react (or it is not prepared in principle) and would produce a deviation in working trajectory, made at a low speed, that would trigger a position error (see ISO 5458 standard) not assumable for requested function. Then it could be possible that tolerance achieved by a more exact expected process would turn out into a worst dimension than the one that could be achieved with casting process, in principle with a larger dimensional variability in process (and hence with a larger tolerance range reachable). As a matter of fact, accuracy is very tight in CNC, (its influence can be ignored in most cases) and it is not the responsible of, for example position tolerance when drilling a hole. Factors as, room and part temperature, manufacturing quality of machining fixtures, stiffness at clamping system, rotating error in 4th axis and part positioning error, if there are previous holes, if machining tool is properly balanced, if shank is suitable for that machining type… have more influence. It is interesting to know that, a non specific element as common, at a manufacturing plant in the enviroment above described, as a robot (not needed to be added, therefore with an additional minimum investment), can improve value chain decreasing manufacturing costs. And when it would be possible to combine that the robot dedicated to handling works could support CNCs´ works in its many waiting time while CNCs cut, and could take an spindle and help to cut; it would be double interesting. So according to all this, it would be interesting to be able to know its behaviour and try to explain what would be necessary to make this possible, reason of this work. Selected robot architecture is SCARA type. The search for a robot easy to be modeled and kinematically and dinamically analyzed, without significant limits in the multifunctionality of requested operations, has lead to this choice. Due to that, other very popular architectures in the industry, f.e. 6 DOFs anthropomorphic robots, have been discarded. This robot has 3 joints, 2 of them are revolute joints (1 DOF each one) and the third one is a cylindrical joint (2 DOFs). The first joint, a revolute one, is used to join floor (body 1) with body 2. The second one, a revolute joint too, joins body 2 with body 3. These 2 bodies can move horizontally in X-Y plane. Body 3 is linked to body 4 with a cylindrical joint. Movement that can be made is paralell to Z axis. The robt has 4 degrees of freedom (4 motors). Regarding potential works that this type of robot can make, its versatility covers either typical handling operations or cutting operations. One of the most common machinings is to drill. That is the reason why it has been chosen for the model and analysis. Within drilling, in order to enclose spectrum force, a typical solid drilling with 9 mm diameter. The robot is considered, at the moment, to have a behaviour as rigid body, as biggest expected influence is the one due to torques at joints. In order to modelize robot, it is used multibodies system method. There are under this heading different sorts of formulations (f.e. Denavit-Hartenberg). D-H creates a great amount of equations and unknown quantities. Those unknown quatities are of a difficult understanding and, for each position, one must stop to think about which meaning they have. The choice made is therefore one of formulation in natural coordinates. This system uses points and unit vectors to define position of each different elements, and allow to share, when it is possible and wished, to define kinematic torques and reduce number of variables at the same time. Unknown quantities are intuitive, constrain equations are easy and number of equations and variables are strongly reduced. However, “pure” natural coordinates suffer 2 problems. The first one is that 2 elements with an angle of 0° or 180°, give rise to singular positions that can create problems in constrain equations and therefore they must be avoided. The second problem is that they do not work directly over the definition or the origin of movements. Given that, it is highly recommended to complement this formulation with angles and distances (relative coordinates). This leads to mixed natural coordinates, and they are the final formulation chosen for this MTh. Mixed natural coordinates have not the problem of singular positions. And the most important advantage lies in their usefulness when applying driving forces, torques or evaluating errors. As they influence directly over origin variable (angles or distances), they control motors directly. The algorithm, simulation and obtaining of results has been programmed with Matlab. To design the model in mixed natural coordinates, it is necessary to model the robot to be studied in 2 steps. The first model is based in natural coordinates. To validate it, it is raised a defined trajectory and it is kinematically analyzed if robot fulfils requested movement, keeping its integrity as multibody system. The points (in this case starting and ending points) that configure the robot are quantified. As the elements are considered as rigid bodies, each of them is defined by its respectively starting and ending point (those points are the most interesting ones from the point of view of kinematics and dynamics) and by a non-colinear unit vector to those points. Unit vectors are placed where there is a rotating axis or when it is needed information of an angle. Unit vectors are not needed to measure distances. Neither DOFs must coincide with the number of unit vectors. Lengths of each arm are defined as geometrical constants. The constrains that define the nature of the robot and relationships among different elements and its enviroment are set. Path is generated by a cloud of continuous points, defined in independent coordinates. Each group of independent coordinates define, in an specific instant, a defined position and posture for the robot. In order to know it, it is needed to know which dependent coordinates there are in that instant, and they are obtained solving the constraint equations with Newton-Rhapson method according to independent coordinates. The reason to make it like this is because dependent coordinates must meet constraints, and this is not the case with independent coordinates. When suitability of model is checked (first approval), it is given next step to model 2. Model 2 adds to natural coordinates from model 1, the relative coordinates in the shape of angles in revoluting torques (3 angles; ϕ1, ϕ 2 and ϕ3) and distances in prismatic torques (1 distance; s). These relative coordinates become the new independent coordinates (replacing to cartesian independent coordinates from model 1, that they were natural coordinates). It is needed to review if unit vector system from model 1 is enough or not . For this specific case, it was necessary to add 1 additional unit vector to define perfectly angles with their related equations of dot and/or cross product. Constrains must be increased in, at least, 4 equations; one per each new variable. The approval of model 2 has two phases. The first one, same as made with model 1, through kinematic analysis of behaviour with a defined path. During this analysis, it could be obtained from model 2, velocities and accelerations, but they are not needed. They are only interesting movements and finite displacements. Once that the consistence of movements has been checked (second approval), it comes when the behaviour with interpolated trajectories must be kinematically analyzed. Kinematic analysis with interpolated trajectories work with a minimum number of 3 master points. In this case, 3 points have been chosen; starting point, middle point and ending point. The number of interpolations has been of 50 ones in each strecht (each 2 master points there is an strecht), turning into a total of 100 interpolations. The interpolation method used is the cubic splines one with condition of constant acceleration both at the starting and at the ending point. This method creates the independent coordinates of interpolated points of each strecht. The dependent coordinates are achieved solving the non-linear constrain equations with Newton-Rhapson method. The method of cubic splines is very continuous, therefore when it is needed to design a trajectory in which there are at least 2 movements clearly differents, it is required to make it in 2 steps and join them later. That would be the case when any of the motors would keep stopped during the first movement, and another different motor would remain stopped during the second movement (and so on). Once that movement is obtained, they are calculated, also with numerical differenciation formulas, the independent velocities and accelerations. This process is analogous to the one before explained, reminding condition that acceleration when t=0 and t=end are 0. Dependent velocities and accelerations are calculated solving related derivatives of constrain equations. In a third approval of the model it is checked, again, consistence of interpolated movement. Inverse dynamics calculates, for a defined movement –knowing position, velocity and acceleration in each instant of time-, and knowing external forces that act (f.e. weights); which forces must be applied in motors (where there is control) in order to obtain requested movement. In inverse dynamics, each instant of time is independent of the others and it has a position, a velocity, an acceleration and known forces. In this specific case, it is intended to apply, at the moment, only forces due to the weight, though forces of another nature could have been added if it would have been preferred. The positions, velocities and accelerations, come from kinematic calculation. The inertial effect of forces taken into account (weight) is calculated. As final result of the inverse dynamic analysis, the are obtained torques that the 4 motors must apply to repeat requested movement with the forces that were acting. The fourth approval of the model consists on confirming that the achieved movement due to the use of the torques obtained in the inverse dynamics, are in accordance with movements from kinematic analysis (theoretical movement). For this, it is necessary to work with direct dynamics. Direct dynamic is in charge of calculating the movements of robot that results from applying torques at motors and forces at the robot. Therefore, the resultant real movement, as there was no change in any condition of the ones obtained at the inverse dynamics (motor torques and inertial forces due to weight of elements) must be the same than theoretical movement. When these results are achieved, it is considered that robot is ready to work. When a machining external force is introduced and it was not taken into account before during the inverse dynamics, and torques at motors considered are the ones of the inverse dynamics, the real movement obtained is not the same than the theoretical movement. Closed loop control is based on comparing real movement with expected movement and introducing required corrrections to minimize or cancel differences. They are applied gains in the way of corrections for position and/or tolerance to remove those differences. Position error is evaluated as the difference, in each point, between theoretical movemment (calculated in the kinematic analysis) and the real movement achieved for each machining force and for an specific gain. Finally, the position error obtained for each machining force and gains are mapped, giving a chart with the best accuracy that the robot can give for each operation that has been requested and which conditions must be provided.

Human-robot interaction for telemanipulation in large workspaces

Independientemente de la existencia de técnicas altamente sofisticadas y capacidades de cómputo cada vez más elevadas, los problemas asociados a los robots que interactúan con entornos no estructurados siguen siendo un desafío abierto en robótica. A pesar de los grandes avances de los sistemas robóticos autónomos, hay algunas situaciones en las que una persona en el bucle sigue siendo necesaria. Ejemplos de esto son, tareas en entornos de fusión nuclear, misiones espaciales, operaciones submarinas y cirugía robótica. Esta necesidad se debe a que las tecnologías actuales no pueden realizar de forma fiable y autónoma cualquier tipo de tarea. Esta tesis presenta métodos para la teleoperación de robots abarcando distintos niveles de abstracción que van desde el control supervisado, en el que un operador da instrucciones de alto nivel en la forma de acciones, hasta el control bilateral, donde los comandos toman la forma de señales de control de bajo nivel. En primer lugar, se presenta un enfoque para llevar a cabo la teleoperación supervisada de robots humanoides. El objetivo es controlar robots terrestres capaces de ejecutar tareas complejas en entornos de búsqueda y rescate utilizando enlaces de comunicación limitados. Esta propuesta incorpora comportamientos autónomos que el operador puede utilizar para realizar tareas de navegación y manipulación mientras se permite cubrir grandes áreas de entornos remotos diseñados para el acceso de personas. Los resultados experimentales demuestran la eficacia de los métodos propuestos. En segundo lugar, se investiga el uso de dispositivos rentables para telemanipulación guiada. Se presenta una aplicación que involucra un robot humanoide bimanual y un traje de captura de movimiento basado en sensores inerciales. En esta aplicación, se estudian las capacidades de adaptación introducidas por el factor humano y cómo estas pueden compensar la falta de sistemas robóticos de alta precisión. Este trabajo es el resultado de una colaboración entre investigadores del Biorobotics Laboratory de la Universidad de Harvard y el Centro de Automática y Robótica UPM-CSIC. En tercer lugar, se presenta un nuevo controlador háptico que combina velocidad y posición. Este controlador bilateral híbrido hace frente a los problemas relacionados con la teleoperación de un robot esclavo con un gran espacio de trabajo usando un dispositivo háptico pequeño como maestro. Se pueden cubrir amplias áreas de trabajo al cambiar automáticamente entre los modos de control de velocidad y posición. Este controlador háptico es ideal para sistemas maestro-esclavo con cinemáticas diferentes, donde los comandos se transmiten en el espacio de la tarea del entorno remoto. El método es validado para realizar telemanipulación hábil de objetos con un robot industrial. Por último, se introducen dos contribuciones en el campo de la manipulación robótica. Por un lado, se presenta un nuevo algoritmo de cinemática inversa, llamado método iterativo de desacoplamiento cinemático. Este método se ha desarrollado para resolver el problema cinemático inverso de un tipo de robot de seis grados de libertad donde una solución cerrada no está disponible. La eficacia del método se compara con métodos numéricos convencionales. Además, se ha diseñado una taxonomía robusta de agarres que permite controlar diferentes manos robóticas utilizando una correspondencia, basada en gestos, entre los espacios de trabajo de la mano humana y de la mano robótica. El gesto de la mano humana se identifica mediante la lectura de los movimientos relativos del índice, el pulgar y el dedo medio del usuario durante las primeras etapas del agarre. ABSTRACT Regardless of the availability of highly sophisticated techniques and ever increasing computing capabilities, the problems associated with robots interacting with unstructured environments remains an open challenge. Despite great advances in autonomous robotics, there are some situations where a humanin- the-loop is still required, such as, nuclear, space, subsea and robotic surgery operations. This is because the current technologies cannot reliably perform all kinds of task autonomously. This thesis presents methods for robot teleoperation strategies at different levels of abstraction ranging from supervisory control, where the operator gives high-level task actions, to bilateral teleoperation, where the commands take the form of low-level control inputs. These strategies contribute to improve the current human-robot interfaces specially in the case of slave robots deployed at large workspaces. First, an approach to perform supervisory teleoperation of humanoid robots is presented. The goal is to control ground robots capable of executing complex tasks in disaster relief environments under constrained communication links. This proposal incorporates autonomous behaviors that the operator can use to perform navigation and manipulation tasks which allow covering large human engineered areas of the remote environment. The experimental results demonstrate the efficiency of the proposed methods. Second, the use of cost-effective devices for guided telemanipulation is investigated. A case study involving a bimanual humanoid robot and an Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU) Motion Capture (MoCap) suit is introduced. Herein, it is corroborated how the adaptation capabilities offered by the human-in-the-loop factor can compensate for the lack of high-precision robotic systems. This work is the result of collaboration between researchers from the Harvard Biorobotics Laboratory and the Centre for Automation and Robotics UPM-CSIC. Thirdly, a new haptic rate-position controller is presented. This hybrid bilateral controller copes with the problems related to the teleoperation of a slave robot with large workspace using a small haptic device as master. Large workspaces can be covered by automatically switching between rate and position control modes. This haptic controller is ideal to couple kinematic dissimilar master-slave systems where the commands are transmitted in the task space of the remote environment. The method is validated to perform dexterous telemanipulation of objects with a robotic manipulator. Finally, two contributions for robotic manipulation are introduced. First, a new algorithm, the Iterative Kinematic Decoupling method, is presented. It is a numeric method developed to solve the Inverse Kinematics (IK) problem of a type of six-DoF robotic arms where a close-form solution is not available. The effectiveness of this IK method is compared against conventional numerical methods. Second, a robust grasp mapping has been conceived. It allows to control a wide range of different robotic hands using a gesture based correspondence between the human hand space and the robotic hand space. The human hand gesture is identified by reading the relative movements of the index, thumb and middle fingers of the user during the early stages of grasping.