Hostname: page-component-77c78cf97d-kmjgn Total loading time: 0.001 Render date: 2026-04-25T00:22:57.541Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Robot 10 parameter compensation method based on Newton–Raphson method

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 September 2023

Lin Chen ,
Pinguang Nie Open the ORCID record for Pinguang Nie [Opens in a new window] ,
Chengqi Meng ,
Xuhong Chen ,
Bingqi Jia  and
Haihong Pan
Lin Chen
Affiliation:
Department of Mechatronics Engineering, College of Mechanical Engineering, Guangxi University, Nanning, China
Pinguang Nie
Affiliation:
Department of Mechatronics Engineering, College of Mechanical Engineering, Guangxi University, Nanning, China
Chengqi Meng
Affiliation:
Department of Mechatronics Engineering, College of Mechanical Engineering, Guangxi University, Nanning, China
Xuhong Chen
Affiliation:
Department of Mechatronics Engineering, College of Mechanical Engineering, Guangxi University, Nanning, China
Bingqi Jia
Affiliation:
Department of Mechatronics Engineering, College of Mechanical Engineering, Guangxi University, Nanning, China
Haihong Pan*
Affiliation:
Department of Mechatronics Engineering, College of Mechanical Engineering, Guangxi University, Nanning, China
*
Corresponding author: Haihong Pan; Email: hustphh@163.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this study, a novel kinematic calibration method is proposed to improve the absolute positioning accuracy of 6R robot. This method can achieve indirect compensation of the 25 parameters of modified Denavit–Hartenberg (MDH). The procedures of the method are threefold. Firstly, the 25-parameter errors model of MDH is initially established. However, only the errors of 10 parameters can be directly compensated in the 25-parameter errors model, since the inverse kinematics algorithm has to meet Pieper criterion. Subsequently, a calibration method is proposed to improve accuracy of the absolute position, which uses the Newton–Raphson method to transform the 25-parameter errors into 10-parameter errors (namely T-10 parameter model). Finally, the errors corresponding to 10 parameters in the T-10 parameters model are identified through the least square method. The calibration performances of T-10 parameters model are comprehensively validated by experimentation on two ER6B-C60 robots and one RS010N robot. After kinematic calibration, the average absolute positioning accuracy of the three robots can be improved by about 90%. The results indicate that the proposed calibration method can achieve more precise absolute positioning accuracy and has a wider range of universality.

Keywords

kinematic calibrationtransform 10-parameterabsolute positioning accuracy6R robots

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Robotica , Volume 41 , Issue 12 , December 2023 , pp. 3565 - 3583
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press

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

Wu, Y., Klimchik, A., Caro, S., Furet, B. and Pashkevich, A., “Geometric calibration of industrial robots using enhanced partial pose measurements and design of experiments,” Robot. Comput. Integr. Manuf. 35, 151–168 (2015).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sun, T., Lian, B., Yang, S. and Song, Y., “Kinematic calibration of serial and parallel robots based on finite and instantaneous screw theory,” IEEE Trans. Robot. 36(3), 816–834 (2020).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, H., Gao, T., Kinugawa, J. and Kosuge, K., “Finding measurement configurations for accurate robot calibration: Validation with a cable-driven robot,” IEEE Trans. Robot. 33(5), 1156–1169 (2017).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Driels, M. R. and Swayze, L. W., “Full-pose calibration of a robot manipulator using a coordinate measuring machine,” Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 8(1), 34–41 (1993).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, C., Wu, Y., Löwe, H. and Li, Z., “POE-based robot kinematic calibration using axis configuration space and the adjoint error model,” IEEE Trans. Robot. 32(5), 1264–1279 (2016).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Veitschegger, W. K. and Wu, C.-H., “A Method for Calibrating and Compensating Robot Kinematic Errors,” In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (1987) pp. 39–44.Google Scholar
Judd, R. P. and Knasinski, A. B., “A technique to calibrate industrial robots with experimental verification,” IEEE Trans. Robot. Autom. 6(1), 20–30 (1987).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hayati, S. and Mirmirani, M., “Improving the absolute positioning accuracy of robot manipulators,” J. Robot. Syst. 2, 397–413 (1985).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hage, H., Bidaud, P. and Jardin, N., “Practical Consideration on the Identifification of the Kinematic Parameters of the Stäubli TX90 Robot,” In: Proceedings of the 13th World Congress in Mechanism and Machine Science, Guanajuato, Mexico (2011) p. 43.Google Scholar
Renders, J.-M., Rossignol, E., Becquet, M. and Hanus, R., “Kinematic calibration and geometrical parameter identification for robots,” Robot. Autom. IEEE Trans. 7(6), 721–732 (1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elatta, A. Y. and Gen, L. P., “An overview of robot calibration,” Inf. Technol. J. 3(1), 74–78 (2004).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Everett, L. J. and Suryohadiprojo, A. H., “A Study of Kinematic Models for Forward Calibration of Manipulators,” In: IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, 1988. Proceedings, vol. 792 (1988) pp. 798–800.Google Scholar
Joubair, A. and Bonev, I. A., “Kinematic calibration of a six-axis serial robot using distance and sphere constraints,” Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 77(1-4), 515–523 (2014).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meggiolaro, M. A. and Dubowsky, S., “An Analytical Method to Eliminate the Redundant Parameters in Robot Calibration,” In: International Conference on Robotics & Automation (2000) p. 3609.Google Scholar
Gao, G., Sun, G., Na, J., Guo, Y. and Wu, X., “Structural parameter identification for 6 DOF industrial robots,” Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 113, 145–155 (2017).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kong, L., Chen, G., Zhang, Z. and Wang, H., “Kinematic calibration and investigation of the influence of universal joint errors on accuracy improvement for a 3-DOF parallel manipulator,” Robot. Comput. Integr. Manuf. 49, 388–397 (2018).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, R., Wu, A., Chen, X. and Wang, J., “A point and distance constraint based 6R robot calibration method through machine vision,” Robot. Comput. Integr. Manuf. 65, 101–959 (2020).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, F., Zeng, Q., Ehmann, K. F., Cao, J. and Li, T., “A calibration method for overconstrained spatial translational parallel manipulators,” Robot. Comput. Integr. Manuf. 57, 241–254 (2019).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joubair, A. and Bonev, I. A., “Kinematic calibration of a six-axis serial robot using distance and sphere constraints,” Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 77(1-4), 515–523 (2015).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nubiola, A. and Bonev, I. A., “Absolute calibration of an ABB IRB 1600 robot using a laser tracker,” Robot. Comput. Integr. Manuf. 29(1), 236–245 (2019).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wu, C. H., “A kinematic CAD tool for the design and control of a robot manipulator,” Electr. Eng. Comput. Sci. 3(1), 58–67 (1984).Google Scholar
Ye, S.-H., Wang, Y., Ren, Y.-J. and Li, D.-K., “Calibration of robot kinematic parameters based on laser tracker,” J. Tianjin Univ. 2, 202–205 (2007).Google Scholar
Shuping, Y., Li, J. and Haidan, W., GB-T12642-2013 Performance Specification and Test Methods for Industrial Robots (China Standard Press, Beijing, 2013).Google Scholar