Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-ttngx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-16T13:12:42.329Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Jacobian-based algorithm for planning the motion of an underactuated rigid body undergoing forward and reverse rotations1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 August 2009

Sung K. Koh
Sung K. Koh*
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Pohang University of Science & Technology, Pohang, Republic of Korea
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: skkoh@postech.ac.kr
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

A Jacobian-based algorithm that is useful for planning the motion of a floating rigid body operated using two input torques is addressed in this paper. The rigid body undergoes a four-rotation fully reversed (FR) sequence of rotations which consists of two initial rotations about the axes of a coordinate frame attached to the body and two subsequent rotations that undo the preceding rotations. Although a Jacobian-based algorithm has been useful in exploring the inverse kinematics of conventional robot manipulators, it is not apparent how a correct FR sequence for a desired orientation could be found because the Jacobian of FR sequences is singular as well as being a null matrix at the identity. To discover the FR sequences that can synthesize the desired orientation circumventing these difficulties, the Jacobian algorithm is reformulated and implemented from arbitrary orientations where the Jacobian is not singular. Due to the insufficient degrees-of-freedom of four-rotation FR sequences required to achieve all possible orientations, the rigid body cannot achieve certain orientations in the configuration space. To best approximate these infeasible orientations, the Jacobian-based algorithm is implemented in the sense of least squares. As some orientations can never be attained by a single four-rotation FR sequence, two different four-rotation FR sequences are exploited alternately to ensure the convergence of the proposed algorithm. Assuming the orientation is supposed to be manipulated using three input torques, the switching Jacobian algorithm proposed in this paper has significant practical importance in planning paths for aerospace and underwater vehicles which are maneuvered using only two input torques due to the failure of one of the torque-generation mechanisms.

Keywords

Underactuated systemAttitude controlFully reversed sequences of rotationsNoncommutativity of finite rigid rotationsJacobian algorithmMotion planning
Type
Article
Information
Robotica , Volume 28 , Issue 5 , September 2010 , pp. 747 - 757
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

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.)

Footnotes

1

Some of the results contained in this paper were published in the proceedings of the 2008 ASME International Design Engineering Technical Conference, paper number DET2008-49413, and are reproduced here with the permission of ASME.

References

1.Bai, X. and Junkins, J. L., “New results for time-optimal three-axis reorientation of a rigid spacecraft,” AIAA J. Guid. Control Dyn. 32 (4), 1071–1076 (2009).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Behal, A., Zergeroglu, E. and Fang, Y., “Nonlinear Tracking Control of an Underactuated Spacecraft,” Proceedings of American Control Conference (Anchorage, AK, 2002) pp. 4684–4689.Google Scholar
3.Bharadwaj, S., Osipchuk, M., Mease, K. D. and Park, F. C., “Geometry and inverse optimality of global attitude stabilization,” J. Guid. Control Dyn. 21 (6), 930–939 (1998).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Bloch, A. M., Krishnaprasad, P. S., Marsden, J. E. and de Alvarez, G. Sanchez, “Stabilization of rigid body dynamics by internal and external torques,” Automatica 28, 745–756 (1992).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5.Bullo, F., Murray, R. M. and Sarti, A., “Control on the Sphere and Reduced Attitude Stabilization,” Nonlinear Control Systems Design Symposium. Also Technical Report CIT/CDS 95-005, available electronically via http://avalon.caltech.edu/cds (Tahoe City, CA, 1995).Google Scholar
6.Bullo, F., Leonard, N. E. and Lewis, A. D., “Controllability and motion algorithms for underactuated lagrangian systems on lie groups,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Control 45 (8), 1437–1454 (2000).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7.Byrnes, C. I. and Isidori, A., “On the attitude stabilization of rigid spacecraft,” Automatica 27 (1), 87–95 (1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8.Casagrande, D., Astolfi, A. and Parisini, T., “Global asymptotic stabilization of the attitude and the angular rates of an underactuated non-symmetric rigid body,” Automatica 44, 1781–1789 (2008).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9.Chirikjian, G. S., “General Methods for Computing Hyper-Redundant Manipulator Inverse Kinematics,” Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (Yokohama, Japan, 1993) pp. 1067–1073.Google Scholar
10.Chirikjian, G. S. and Burdick, J., “Kinematically optimal hyper-redundant manipulator configurations,” IEEE Trans. Robot. Autom. 11 (6), 794–806 (1995).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11.Chirikjian, G. S. and Kyatkin, A. B., Engineering Application of Noncommutative Harmonic Analysis (CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 2000).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12.Crouch, P. E., “Spacecraft attitude control and stabilization: applications of geometric control theory to rigid body models,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Control 29 (4), 321–331 (1984).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13.Fernandes, G., Gurvts, L. and Li, Z. X., “A Variational Approach to Optimal Nonholonoic Motion Planning,” IEEE Conference on Robotics and Automation (Sacramento, CA, 1991) pp. 680–685.Google Scholar
14.Godhavn, J. M. and Egeland, O., “A Lyapunov approach to exponential stabilization of nonholonomic systems in power form,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Control 42 (7), 1028–1032 (1997).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15.Koditschek, D. E., “The application of total energy as a Lyapunov function for mechanical control systems,” In: Dynamics and Control of Multibody Systems (Krishnaprasad, P. S., Marsden, J. E. and Simo, J. C., eds.) (AMS, Rhode Island, 1989) 97, 131–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16.Koh, S. K., Ostrowski, J. P. and Ananthasuresh, G. K., “Control of micro-satellite orientation using bounded-input, fully-reversed MEMS actuators,” Int. J. Robot. Res. 21 (5–6), 591–605 (2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17.Koh, S. K., Ananthasuresh, G. K. and Croke, C., “Analysis of fully-reversed sequences of non-commutative free-body rotations,” J. Mech. Des. 126 (4), 609–616 (2004).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18.Koh, S. K. and Ananthasuresh, G. K., “Inverse kinematics of an untethered rigid body undergoing a sequence of forward and reverse rotations,” J. Mech. Des. 126 (5), 813–821 (2004).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19.Koh, S. K., Chirikjian, G. S. and Ananthasuresh, G. K., “A Jacobian-Based Algorithm for the Attitude Control of a Rigid Body Undergoing Fully-Reversed Sequences of Rotations,” ASME 2007 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences, Las Vegas, NV (2007) DETC2007-34972.Google Scholar
20.Leonard, N. E., “Dynamics and Control of Underactuated Spacecraft & Underwater Vehicles,” Proceedings of the 34th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (New Orleans, 1995) pp. 3980–3985.Google Scholar
21.Li, J., Koh, S. K., Ananthasuresh, G. K. and Ananthakrishnan, S., “A Novel Attitude Control Technique for Miniature Spacecraft,” CD-ROM proceedings of the MEMS symposium at the 2001 ASME International Mechanical Engineering Conference and Exhibition, New York (2001).Google Scholar
22.Lovera, M. and Astolfi, A., “Spacecraft attitude control using magnetic actuators,” Automatica 40 (8), 1405–1414 (2004).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23.Martinez, S., Cortes, J. and Bullo, F., “A Catalog of Inverse-Kinematics Planners for Underactuated Systems on Matrix Lie Groups,” IEEE/RSJ Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (Las Vegas, NY, 2003), pp. 625–630.Google Scholar
24.Morin, P. and Samson, C., “Time-varying exponential stabilization of a rigid spacecraft with two control torques,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Control 42 (4), 528–534 (1997).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
25.Murray, R. M., Li, Z. and Sastry, S. S., A Mathematical Introduction to Robotic Manipulation (CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, USA, 1994).Google Scholar
26.Sastry, S. and Marsden, J. E., Nonlinear Systems: Analysis, Stability and Control (Springer-Verlag, New York, 2004).Google Scholar
27.Stein, D., Scheinerman, E. R. and Chirikjian, G. S., “Mathematical models of binary spherical-motion encoders,” IEEE Trans. Mechatronics 8 (2), 234–244 (2003).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
28.Strang, G., Linear Algebra and Its Applications (Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers, Orlando, FL, 1988).Google Scholar
29.Tsiotras, P., Corless, M. and Longuski, J. M., “A Novel approach to the attitude control of axisymmetric spacecraft,” Automatica 31 (8), 1099–1112 (1995).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
30.Tsiotras, P. and Luo, J., “Control of underactuated spacecraft with bounded inputs,” Automatica 36 (8), 1153–1169 (2000).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
31.Walsh, G. C. and Sastry, S., “On reorienting linked rigid bodies using internal motions,” IEEE Trans. Robot. Autom. 11 (1), 139–146 (1995).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
32.Wen, J. T.-Y. and Kreutz-Delgado, K., “The attitude control problem,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Control 36 (10), 1148–1162 (1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
33.Zheng, Q. and Wu, F., “Nonlinear H ∞ control designs with axisymmetric spacecraft control,” AIAA J. Guid. Control Dyn. 32 (3), 850–859 (2009).CrossRefGoogle Scholar