Global vs. local nonlinear optimization techniques for human-like movement of an anthropomorphic robot

In this paper a comparison between using global and local optimization techniques for solving the problem of generating human-like arm and hand movements for an anthropomorphic dual arm robot is made. Although the objective function involved in each optimization problem is convex, there is no evidence that the admissible regions of these problems are convex sets. For the sequence of movements for which the numerical tests were done there were no significant differences between the optimal solutions obtained using the global and the local techniques. This suggests that the optimal solution obtained using the local solver is indeed a global solution.

Towards Human-like Bimanual Movements in Anthropomorphic Robots: A Nonlinear Optimization Approach

Previously we have presented a model for generating human-like arm and hand movements on an unimanual anthropomorphic robot involved in human-robot collaboration tasks. The present paper aims to extend our model in order to address the generation of human-like bimanual movement sequences which are challenged by scenarios cluttered with obstacles. Movement planning involves large scale nonlinear constrained optimization problems which are solved using the IPOPT solver. Simulation studies show that the model generates feasible and realistic hand trajectories for action sequences involving the two hands. The computational costs involved in the planning allow for real-time human robot-interaction. A qualitative analysis reveals that the movements of the robot exhibit basic characteristics of human movements.

Towards human-like bimanual movements in anthropomorphic robots: a nonlinear optimization approach

Previously we have presented a model for generating human-like arm and hand movements on an unimanual anthropomorphic robot involved in human-robot collaboration tasks. The present paper aims to extend our model in order to address the generation of human-like bimanual movement sequences which are challenged by scenarios cluttered with obstacles. Movement planning involves large scale nonlinear constrained optimization problems which are solved using the IPOPT solver. Simulation studies show that the model generates feasible and realistic hand trajectories for action sequences involving the two hands. The computational costs involved in the planning allow for real-time human robot-interaction. A qualitative analysis reveals that the movements of the robot exhibit basic characteristics of human movements.

Nonlinear optimization for human-like synchronous movements of a dual arm-hand robotic system

In previous work we have presented a model capable of generating human-like movements for a dual arm-hand robot involved in human-robot cooperative tasks. However, the focus was on the generation of reach-to-grasp and reach-to-regrasp bimanual movements and no synchrony in timing was taken into account. In this paper we extend the previous model in order to accomplish bimanual manipulation tasks by synchronously moving both arms and hands of an anthropomorphic robotic system. Specifically, the new extended model has been designed for two different tasks with different degrees of difficulty. Numerical results were obtained by the implementation of the IPOPT solver embedded in our MATLAB simulator.

Design and Control of an Anthropomorphic Robotic Finger with Multi-point Tactile Sensation

The goal of this research is to develop the prototype of a tactile sensing platform for anthropomorphic manipulation research. We investigate this problem through the fabrication and simple control of a planar 2-DOF robotic finger inspired by anatomic consistency, self-containment, and adaptability. The robot is equipped with a tactile sensor array based on optical transducer technology whereby localized changes in light intensity within an illuminated foam substrate correspond to the distribution and magnitude of forces applied to the sensor surface plane. The integration of tactile perception is a key component in realizing robotic systems which organically interact with the world. Such natural behavior is characterized by compliant performance that can initiate internal, and respond to external, force application in a dynamic environment. However, most of the current manipulators that support some form of haptic feedback either solely derive proprioceptive sensation or only limit tactile sensors to the mechanical fingertips. These constraints are due to the technological challenges involved in high resolution, multi-point tactile perception. In this work, however, we take the opposite approach, emphasizing the role of full-finger tactile feedback in the refinement of manual capabilities. To this end, we propose and implement a control framework for sensorimotor coordination analogous to infant-level grasping and fixturing reflexes. This thesis details the mechanisms used to achieve these sensory, actuation, and control objectives, along with the design philosophies and biological influences behind them. The results of behavioral experiments with a simple tactilely-modulated control scheme are also described. The hope is to integrate the modular finger into an %engineered analog of the human hand with a complete haptic system.

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.

A Fault-Tolerant Manipulator Robot Based on H(2), H(infinity), and Mixed H(2)/H(infinity) Markovian Controls

This paper develops a Markovian jump model to describe the fault occurrence in a manipulator robot of three joints. This model includes the changes of operation points and the probability that a fault occurs in an actuator. After a fault, the robot works as a manipulator with free joints. Based on the developed model, a comparative study among three Markovian controllers, H(2), H(infinity), and mixed H(2)/H(infinity) is presented, applied in an actual manipulator robot subject to one and two consecutive faults.

Robot measuring form errors

This work presents an automated system for the measurement of form errors of mechanical components using an industrial robot. A three-probe error separation technique was employed to allow decoupling between the measured form error and errors introduced by the robotic system. A mathematical model of the measuring system was developed to provide inspection results by means of the solution of a system of linear equations. A new self-calibration procedure, which employs redundant data from several runs, minimizes the influence of probes zero-adjustment on the final result. Experimental tests applied to the measurement of straightness errors of mechanical components were accomplished and demonstrated the effectiveness of the employed methodology. (C) 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Simulated annealing with adaptive neighborhood: A case study in off-line robot path planning

Simulated annealing (SA) is an optimization technique that can process cost functions with degrees of nonlinearities, discontinuities and stochasticity. It can process arbitrary boundary conditions and constraints imposed on these cost functions. The SA technique is applied to the problem of robot path planning. Three situations are considered here: the path is represented as a polyline; as a Bezier curve; and as a spline interpolated curve. In the proposed SA algorithm, the sensitivity of each continuous parameter is evaluated at each iteration increasing the number of accepted solutions. The sensitivity of each parameter is associated to its probability distribution in the definition of the next candidate. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Influence of Modified Posterior Reconstruction of the Rhabdosphincter on Early Recovery of Continence and Anastomotic Leakage Rates after Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy

Background: Posterior reconstruction (PR) of the rhabdosphincter has been previously described during retropubic radical prostatectomy, and shorter times to return of urinary continence were reported using this technical modification. This technique has also been applied during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP); however, contradictory results have been reported. Objective: We describe here a modified technique for PR of the rhabdosphincter during RARP and report its impact on early recovery of urinary continence and on cystographic leakage rates. Design, setting, and participants: We analyzed 803 consecutive patients who underwent RARP by a single surgeon over a 12-mo period: 330 without performing PR and 473 with PR. Surgical procedure: The reconstruction was performed using two 6-in 3-0 Poliglecaprone sutures tied together. The free edge of the remaining Denonvillier`s fascia was identified after prostatectomy and approximated to the posterior aspect of the rhabdosphincter and the posterior median raphe using one arm of the continuous suture. The second layer of the reconstruction was then performed with the other arm of the suture, approximating the posterior lip of the bladder neck and vesicoprostatic muscle to the posterior urethral edge. Measurements: Continence rates were assessed with a self-administrated, validated questionnaire (Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite) at 1, 4, 12, and 24 wk after catheter removal. Continence was defined as the use of ""no absorbent pads."" Cystogram was performed in all patients on postoperative day 4 or 5 before catheter removal. Results and limitations: There was no significant difference between the groups with respect to patient age, body mass index, prostate-specific antigen levels, prostate weight, American Urological Association symptom score, estimated blood loss, operative time, number of nerve-sparing procedures, and days with catheter. In the PR group, the continence rates at 1, 4, 12, and 24 wk postoperatively were 22.7%, 42.7%, 91.8%, and 96.3%, respectively; in the non-PR group, the continence rates were 28.7%, 51.6%, 91.1%, and 97%, respectively. The modified PR technique resulted in significantly higher continence rates at 1 and 4 wk after catheter removal (p = 0.048 and 0.016, respectively), although the continence rates at 12 and 24 wk were not significantly affected (p = 0.908 and p = 0.741, respectively). The median interval to recovery of continence was also statistically significantly shorter in the PR group (median: 4 wk; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.39-4.61) when compared to the non-PR group (median: 6 wk; 95% CI: 5.18-6.82; log-rank test, p = 0.037). Finally, the incidence of cystographic leaks was lower in the PR group (0.4% vs 2.1%; p = 0.036). Although the patients` baseline characteristics were similar between the groups, the patients were not preoperatively randomized and unknown confounding factors may have influenced the results. Conclusions: Our modified PR combines the benefits of early recovery of continence reported with the original PR technique with a reinforced watertight closure of the posterior anastomotic wall. Shorter interval to recovery of continence and lower incidence of cystographic leaks were demonstrated with our PR technique when compared to RARP with no reconstruction. (C) 2010 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Predictive Factors for Positive Surgical Margins and Their Locations After Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy

Background: Positive surgical margin (PSM) after radical prostatectomy (RP) has been shown to be an independent predictive factor for cancer recurrence. Several investigations have correlated clinical and histopathologic findings with surgical margin status after open RP. However, few studies have addressed the predictive factors for PSM after robot-assisted laparoscopic RP (RARP). Objective: We sought to identify predictive factors for PSMs and their locations after RARP. Design, setting, and participants: We prospectively analyzed 876 consecutive patients who underwent RARP from January 2008 to May 2009. Intervention: All patients underwent RARP performed by a single surgeon with previous experience of > 1500 cases. Measurements: Stepwise logistic regression was used to identify potential predictive factors for PSM. Three logistic regression models were built: (1) one using preoperative variables only, (2) another using all variables (preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative) combined, and (3) one created to identify potential predictive factors for PSM location. Preoperative variables entered into the models included age, body mass index (BMI), prostate-specific antigen, clinical stage, number of positive cores, percentage of positive cores, and American Urological Association symptom score. Intra-and postoperative variables analyzed were type of nerve sparing, presence of median lobe, percentage of tumor in the surgical specimen, gland size, histopathologic findings, pathologic stage, and pathologic Gleason grade. Results and limitations: In the multivariable analysis including preoperative variables, clinical stage was the only independent predictive factor for PSM, with a higher PSM rate for T3 versus T1c (odds ratio [OR]: 10.7; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.6-43.8) and for T2 versus T1c (OR: 2.9; 95% CI, 1.9-4.6). Considering pre-, intra-, and postoperative variables combined, percentage of tumor, pathologic stage, and pathologic Gleason score were associated with increased risk of PSM in the univariable analysis (p < 0.001 for all variables). However, in the multivariable analysis, pathologic stage (pT2 vs pT1; OR: 2.9; 95% CI, 1.9-4.6) and percentage of tumor in the surgical specimen (OR: 8.7; 95% CI, 2.2-34.5; p = 0.0022) were the only independent predictive factors for PSM. Finally, BMI was shown to be an independent predictive factor(OR: 1.1; 95% CI, 1.0-1.3; p = 0.0119) for apical PSMs, with increasing BMI predicting higher incidence of apex location. Because most of our patients were referred from other centers, the biopsy technique and the number of cores were not standardized in our series. Conclusions: Clinical stage was the only preoperative variable independently associated with PSM after RARP. Pathologic stage and percentage of tumor in the surgical specimen were identified as independent predictive factors for PSMs when analyzing pre-, intra-, and postoperative variables combined. BMI was shown to be an independent predictive factor for apical PSMs. (C) 2010 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B. V. All rights reserved.

Periurethral Suspension Stitch During Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy: Description of the Technique and Continence Outcomes

Background: Several studies have shown that robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP) is feasible, with favorable complication rates and short hospital times. However, the early recovery of urinary continence remains a challenge to be overcome. Objective: We describe our technique of periurethral retropubic suspension stitch during RALP and report its impact on early recovery of urinary continence. Design, setting, and participants: We analyze prospectively 331 consecutive patients who underwent RALP, 94 without the placement of suspension stitch (group 1) and 237 with the application of the suspension stitch (group 2). Surgical procedure: The only difference between the groups was the placement of the puboperiurethral stitch after the ligation of the dorsal venous complex (DVC). The periurethral retropubic stitch was placed using a 12-in monofilament polyglytone suture on a CTI needle. The stitch was passed from right to left between the urethra and DVC, and then through the periostium on the pubic bone. The stitch was passed again through the DVC, and then through the pubic bone in a figure eight, and then tied. Measurements: Continence rates were assessed with a self-administered validated questionnaire (Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite [EPIC] at 1, 3, 6, and 12 mo after the procedure. Continence was defined as the use of no absorbent pads or no leakage of urine. Results and limitations: In group 1, the continence rate at 1, 3, 6, and 12 mo postoperatively was 33%, 83%, 94.7%, and 95.7%, respectively; in group 2, the continence rate was 40%, 92.8%, 97.9%, and 97.9%, respectively. The suspension technique resulted in significantly greater continence rates at 3 mo after RALP (p = 0.013). The median/mean interval to recovery of continence was also statistically significantly shorter in the suspension group (median: 6 wk; mean: 7.338 wk: 95% confidence interval [CI]: 6.387-8.288) compared to the non-suspension group (median: 7 wk; mean: 9.585 wk: 95% CI: 7.558-11.612; log rank test, p = 0.02). Conclusions: The suspension stitch during RALP resulted in a statistically significantly shorter interval to recovery of continence and higher continence rates at 3 mo after the procedure. (C) 2009 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Pentafecta: A New Concept for Reporting Outcomes of Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy

Background: Widespread use of prostate-specific antigen screening has resulted in younger and healthier men being diagnosed with prostate cancer. Their demands and expectations of surgical intervention are much higher and cannot be adequately addressed with the classic trifecta outcome measures. Objective: A new and more comprehensive method for reporting outcomes after radical prostatectomy, the pentafecta, is proposed. Design, setting, and participants: From January 2008 through September 2009, details of 1111 consecutive patients who underwent robot-assisted radical prostatectomy performed by a single surgeon were retrospectively analyzed. Of 626 potent men, 332 who underwent bilateral nerve sparing and who had 1 yr of follow-up were included in the study group. Measurements: In addition to the traditional trifecta outcomes, two perioperative variables were included in the pentafecta: no postoperative complications and negative surgical margins. Patients who attained the trifecta and concurrently the two additional outcomes were considered as having achieved the pentafecta. A logistic regression model was created to evaluate independent factors for achieving the pentafecta. Results and limitations: Continence, potency, biochemical recurrence-free survival, and trifecta rates at 12 mo were 96.4%, 89.8%, 96.4%, and 83.1%, respectively. With regard to the perioperative outcomes, 93.4% had no postoperative complication and 90.7% had negative surgical margins. The pentafecta rate at 12 mo was 70.8%. On multivariable analysis, patient age (p = 0.001) was confirmed as the only factor independently associated with the pentafecta. Conclusions: A more comprehensive approach for reporting prostate surgery outcomes, the pentafecta, is being proposed. We believe that pentafecta outcomes more accurately represent patients` expectations after minimally invasive surgery for prostate cancer. This approach may be beneficial and may be used when counseling patients with clinically localized disease. (C) 2011 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B. V. All rights reserved.

An optical flow-based sensing system for reactive mobile robot navigation

This work discusses the use of optical flow to generate the sensorial information a mobile robot needs to react to the presence of obstacles when navigating in a non-structured environment. A sensing system based on optical flow and time-to-collision calculation is here proposed and experimented, which accomplishes two important paradigms. The first one is that all computations are performed onboard the robot, in spite of the limited computational capability available. The second one is that the algorithms for optical flow and time-to-collision calculations are fast enough to give the mobile robot the capability of reacting to any environmental change in real-time. Results of real experiments in which the sensing system here proposed is used as the only source of sensorial data to guide a mobile robot to avoid obstacles while wandering around are presented, and the analysis of such results allows validating the proposed sensing system.

10 kVp rule – An anthropomorphic pelvis phantom imaging study using a CR system: impact on image quality and effective dose using AEC and manual mode

Purpose - This study aims to investigate the influence of tube potential (kVp) variation in relation to perceptual image quality and effective dose (E) for pelvis using automatic exposure control (AEC) and non-AEC in a Computed Radiography (CR) system. Methods and materials - To determine the effects of using AEC and non-AEC by applying the 10 kVp rule in two experiments using an anthropomorphic pelvis phantom. Images were acquired using 10 kVp increments (60–120 kVp) for both experiments. The first experiment, based on seven AEC combinations, produced 49 images. The mean mAs from each kVp increment were used as a baseline for the second experiment producing 35 images. A total of 84 images were produced and a panel of 5 experienced observers participated for the image scoring using the two alternative forced choice (2AFC) visual grading software. PCXMC software was used to estimate E. Results - A decrease in perceptual image quality as the kVp increases was observed both in non-AEC and AEC experiments, however no significant statistical differences (p > 0.05) were found. Image quality scores from all observers at 10 kVp increments for all mAs values using non-AEC mode demonstrates a better score up to 90 kVp. E results show a statistically significant decrease (p = 0.000) on the 75th quartile from 0.37 mSv at 60 kVp to 0.13 mSv at 120 kVp when applying the 10 kVp rule in non-AEC mode. Conclusion - Using the 10 kVp rule, no significant reduction in perceptual image quality is observed when increasing kVp whilst a marked and significant E reduction is observed.