Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-jtdwj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-31T22:16:09.710Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Task-space bilateral teleoperation systems for heterogeneous robots with time-varying delays

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 May 2014

Yen-Chen Liu
Yen-Chen Liu*
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Engineering, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan 70101, Taiwan
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: yliu@mail.ncku.edu.tw
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

This paper proposes control algorithms for heterogeneous teleoperation systems to guarantee stability and tracking performance in the presence of time-varying communication delays. Because robotic manipulators, in most applications of bilateral teleoperation systems, interact with a human operator and remote environment on the end-effector, the control system is developed in the task-space. When the dynamic parameters of the robots are unknown and the communication network is subject to time-varying delay, the developed controller can ensure stability and task-space position tracking. Additionally, if the robotic systems are influenced by human and environmental forces, the presented teleoperation control system is demonstrated to be stable and all signals are proven to be ultimately bounded. By employing the redundancy of the slave robot for sub-task control, the proposed teleoperation system can autonomously achieve additional missions in the remote environment. Numerical examples utilizing a redundant planar robot are addressed to validate the proposed task-space teleoperators with time-varying delay.

Keywords

Teleoperation systemTime-varying delayHeterogeneous robotsTask-space controlAdaptive control

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Robotica , Volume 33 , Issue 10 , December 2015 , pp. 2065 - 2082
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1. Arcara, P. and Melchiorri, C., “Control schemes for teleoperation with time delay: A comparative study,” Robot. Auton. Syst. 38 (1), 49–64 (Jan. 2002).Google Scholar
2. Hokayem, P. F. and Spong, M. W., “Bilateral teleoperation: An historical survey,” Automatica 42 (12), 2035–2057 (Dec. 2006).Google Scholar
3. Slawiñski, E., Mut, V., Salinas, L. and Garcia, S., “Teleoperation of a mobile robot with time-varying delay and force feedback,” Robotica 30 (1), 67–77 (Jan. 2012).Google Scholar
4. Li, Z., Cao, X., Tang, Y., Li, R. and Ye, W., “Bilateral teleoperation of holonomic constrained robotic systems with time-varying delays,” IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas. 62 (4), 752–765 (2013).Google Scholar
5. Rodriguez-Seda, E. J., Tory, J. J., Erignac, C. A., Murray, P., Stipanović, D. M. and Spong, M. W., “Bilateral teleoperation of multiple mobile agents: Coordinated motion and collision avoidance,” IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol. 18 (4), 984–992 (2010).Google Scholar
6. Richard, J. P., “Time-delay systems: An overview of some recent advances and open problems,” Automatica 39 (10), 1667–1694 (Oct. 2003).Google Scholar
7. Liu, Y.-C. and Chopra, N., “Control of robotic manipulators under input/output communication delays: Theory and experiments,” IEEE Trans. Robot. 28 (3), 742–751 (Jun. 2012).Google Scholar
8. Niemeyer, G. and Slotine, J., “Stable adaptive teleoperation,” IEEE J. Ocean. Eng. 16 (1), 152–162 (Jan. 1991).Google Scholar
9. Anderson, R. J. and Spong, M. W., “Bilateral control of teleoperators with time delay,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Control 34 (5), 494–501 (May 1989).Google Scholar
10. Chopra, N., Spong, M. W., Ortega, R. and Barabanov, N. E., “On tracking performance in bilateral teleoperation,” IEEE Trans. Robot. 22 (4), 861–866 (Aug. 2006).Google Scholar
11. Chopra, N., Spong, M. W. and Lozano, R., “Synchronization of bilateral teleoperators with time delay,” Automatica 44 (8), 2142–2148 (Aug. 2008).Google Scholar
12. Lee, D. and Spong, M. W., “Passive bilateral teleoperation with constant time delay,” IEEE Trans. Robot. 22 (2), 269–281 (Apr. 2006).Google Scholar
13. Forouzantabar, A., Talebi, H. and Sedigh, A., “Adaptive neural network control of bilateral teleoperation with constant time delay,” Nonlinear Dyn. 67 (2), 1123–1134 (Jan. 2012).Google Scholar
14. Kang, Y., Li, Z., Shang, W. and Xi, H., “Motion synchronisation of bilateral teleoperation systems with mode-dependent time-varying communication delays,” IET Control Theory Appl. 4 (10), 2129–2140 (Oct. 2010).Google Scholar
15. Ryu, J.-H., Artigas, J. and Preusche, C., “A passive bilateral control scheme for a teleoperation with time-varying communication delay,” Mechatronics 20 (7), 812–823 (2010).Google Scholar
16. Nuño, E., Basanez, L., Ortega, R. and Spong, M., “Position tracking for non-linear teleoperators with variable-time delay,” Int. J. Robot. Res. 28 (7), 895–910 (Jul. 2009).Google Scholar
17. Hua, C.-C. and Liu, X. P., “Delay-dependent stability criteria of teleoperation systems with asymmetric time-varying delays,” IEEE Trans. Robot. 26 (5), 925–932 (Oct. 2010).Google Scholar
18. Lozano, R., Chopra, N. and Spong, M. W., “Passivation of Force Reflecting Bilateral Teleoperation With Time Varying Delay,” Proceedings of the 8th Mechatronics Forum, Enschede, the Netherlands (Jun. 24–26, 2002), pp. 954–962.Google Scholar
19. Yokokohji, Y., Imaida, T. and Yoshikawa, T., “Bilateral Teleoperation Under Time-Varying Communication Delay,” IEEE/RSJ Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Kyongju, South Korea (Oct. 17–21, 1999) pp. 1854–1859.Google Scholar
20. Fujita, H. and Namerikawa, T., “Delay-Independent Stabilization for Teleoperation with Time Varying Delay,” Proceedings of the American Control Conference, St. Louis, USA (Jun. 10–12, 2009) pp. 5459–5464.Google Scholar
21. Islam, S., Liu, P. and Saddik, A. E., “Nonlinear control for teleoperation systems with time-varying delay,” Nonlinear Dyn. 76 (2), 931–954 (Apr. 2014).Google Scholar
22. Liu, Y.-C. and Chopra, N., “Control of semi-autonomous teleoperation system with time delays,” Automatica 49 (6), 1553–1565 (2013).Google Scholar
23. Malysz, P. and Sirouspour, S., “A kinematic control framework for single-slave asymmetric teleoperation systems,” IEEE Trans. Robot. 27 (5), 901–917 (Oct. 2011).Google Scholar
24. Nath, N., Tatlicioglu, E. and Dawson, D. M., “Teleoperation with kinematically redundant robot manipulators with sub-task objectives,” Robotica 27 (7), 1027–1038 (Dec. 2009).Google Scholar
25. Wang, H. and Xie, Y., “Task-space framework for bilateral teleoperation with time delays,” ASME J. Dyn. Syst. Meas. Control 134 (5), 2129–2140 (2012).Google Scholar
26. Kawada, H., Yoshida, K. and Namerikawa, T., “Synchronized Control for Teleoperation with Different Configurations and Communication Delay,” IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, New Orleans, USA (Dec. 12–14, 2007) pp. 2546–2551.Google Scholar
27. Spong, M. W., Hutchinson, S. and Vidyasagar, M., Robot Modeling and Control (John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 2006).Google Scholar
28. Krstic, M., Delay Compensation for Nonlinear, Adaptive, and PDE Systems (Birkhauser, Massachusetts, 2009).Google Scholar
29. Nakamura, Y., Advanced Robotics: Redundancy and Optimization (Addison-Wesley, Massachusetts, 1991).Google Scholar
30. Zergeroglu, E., Dawson, D. M., Walker, I. and Setlur, P., “Nonlinear tracking control of kinematically redundant robot manipulators,” IEEE/ASME Trans. Mech. 9 (1), 129–132 (Mar. 2004).Google Scholar
31. Tatlicioglu, E., Braganza, D., Burg, T. C. and Dawson, D. W., “Adaptive control of redundant robot manipulators with sub-task objectives,” Robotica 27 (6), 873–881 (2009).Google Scholar
32. Liu, Y.-C. and Chopra, N., “Controlled synchronization of heterogeneous robotic manipulators in the task space,” IEEE Trans. Robot. 28 (1), 268–275 (2012).Google Scholar
33. Hale, J. K. and Lunel, S. M. V., Introduction to Functional Differential Equations (Springer-Verlag, New York, 1993).Google Scholar
34. Khalil, H. K., Nonlinear Systems (Prentice Hall, New Jersey, 2002).Google Scholar
35. Hsu, P., Hauser, J. and Sastry, S., “Dynamic control of redundant manipulators,” J. Robot. Syst. 6, 133–148 (Apr. 1989).Google Scholar
36. Yoshikawa, T., “Analysis and Control of Robot Manipulators with Redundancy,” Proceedings of the 1st International Symposium on Robotics Research (1984) pp. 735–747.Google Scholar
37. Tatlicioglu, E., McIntyre, M. L., Dawson, D. M. and Walker, I. D., “Adaptive non-linear tracking control of kinematically redundant robot manipulators,” Int. J. Robot. Autom. 23 (2), 98–105 (Mar. 2008).Google Scholar
38. Özbay, U., Şahin, H. T. and Zergeroğlu, E., “Robust tracking control of kinematically redundany robot manipulators subject to multiple self-motion criteria,” Robotica 26 (6), 711–728 (2008).Google Scholar
39. Lozano, R., Chopra, N. and Spong, M. W., “Convergence Analysis of Bilateral Teleoperation with Constant Human Input,” Proceedings of the American Control Conference, New York, USA (Jul. 11–13, 2007) pp. 1443–1448.Google Scholar