AN ADAPTIVE CONTROLLER FOR A DIRECT-DRIVE SCARA ROBOT: ANALYSIS AND SIMULATION

Louis-A. Dessaint, Maarouf Saad, Bernard Hebert and Christian Gargour Laboratoire de Commande lndustrielle Ecole de technologie superieure Universitb du Quebec Montreal (Quebec), Canada H2T 2C8

Abstracf This paper presents a direct adaptive controller for trajectory tracking of high-speed robots such as a direct-drive SCARA robot. In this robot, non linear effects due to centrifugal, Coriolis and gravity forces are more important than friction forces, unlike most industrial robots. The control law of the adaptive scheme consists in a PD regulator plus feedforward compensation of full dynamics. The feedforward terms are adjusted by an adaptation law so that the steady state position errors are zero. It will be seen that the regulator gain matrix Kd can be fixed or timevarying, in the latter case, the adaptive scheme becomes very similar to the well known computed torque scheme. However with the adaptive controller, the joint accelerations measurement is not required and no inversion of the estimated mass matrix is involved. The tracking performances of the controller applied to a 4 d.0.f. SCARA will be illustrated by a digital simulation. A real time implementation will be reported later.
1. Jntroduction

the controller output as a feedforward term. In the computed torque scheme, the full dynamics of the manipulator are taken into account by the online estimation of the links and payload parameters such as moment of inertia, mass, friction, etc. A real-time implementation of this scheme has been reported by Craig [2] but his method requires the estimation of joint accelerations and the inversion of the estimated mass matrix which are both computationaly expensive. Recently, Slotine and Li [3] have proposed an adaptation method that employs the reference acceleration rather than an estimate of the real acceleration. Moreover this method does not require any matrix inversion. Asare and Wilson [4] have also presented a similar approach in which the adaptive algorithm is derived from Popov hyperstability theory. Whatever controller is adopted, PID, computed torque or adaptive, a digital simulation is mandatory due to the complexity of the controller and of the dynamics involved. Therefore, sections 2 and 3 will start by the modeling and the simulation of the SCARA dynamics. In section 4 , the Slotine adaptive controller to which viscous friction representation is added is analyzed and simulated. In section 5, the introduction of a time-varying derivate gain matrix into the Slotine controller will lead to a computed torque scheme with improved performances. Again this controller will be analyzed and simulated.

Many schemes have been proposed for the control of the actuators of articulated manipulators. These schemes range from the independent joint control to the non linear control with full dynamics representation also know as the computed torque scheme. The independent joint controller consisting in a PD or PID controller for each link gives acceptable accuracy and repeatability for ordinary tasks such as "pick and place" because the interaction torque of the links is attenuated by the high gear reduction ratio of most industrial robots actuators. In order to improve the tracking performances for high speed and high precision tasks, it has been proposed to estimate the disturbance torque using a state observer [l]. This disturbance torque includes the interaction torque plus other effects due to the gravity, centrifugal, Coriolis forces, etc. The estimated disturbance torque is added to

2 . -

Model of the SCARA

The SCARA configuration has three parallel revolute joints allowing it to move and orient in a plane with a fourth prismatic joint for moving the end-effector normal to the plan (Fig. 1). The dynamics of the SCARA is written in a general form as:
z = M(0) 6 + V(0,

6) + F(8) + G(0)

(11

where M(0) is a symmetric positive definite 4x4 matrix, V(e,e) is a 4x1 vector of centrifugal and Coriolis terms, F(8) is a 4x1 vector of viscous frictions and z is a 4x1 vector of three revolute joint torques and one prismatic joint force. Note that the symbole T will be used even for the linear joint force of the prismatic joint.
-P5 -P5

0
P5

t.. -

aI

'%

0 0 - P4g 0

where

Fig. 1 Schematic diagram of the 4 d.0.f. SCARA robot The vector of centrifugal and Coriolis terms can be written as the product:

v (e. e) = vde. e) e

(2)

In order to obtain the matrix V M @ > ~ )the , vector V(0,e) is written in the form:

d0,e) =

e' e' 1 e'

v 2
v 3

(e)

e (0) e
(0)

(3)

v 4

1
Then expressing these equations in a linear fashion in terms of the parameters pi, it follows :

Where the Vi(0) are 4x4 symmetric matrices and then:

vA0,

e)

e'

v 2

(0)

e' v3 (e)

(4)

The matrices M and VM are not independent, it can be easily shown that ( M - ~ V M ) is skewsymmetric, a property that will be useful later in the controller design. Another interesting property of the dynamic equations (appendix 1) is that although they appear non linear, they can be rewritten in a form that is linear in terms of suitably chosen set of manipulator parameters. Rewriting the dynamic equations of the SCARA in terms of a set of nine parameters PI, p2,...,p9 yields :
415

Hence the dynamic equations can be written in a form that is linear in terms of the parameters vector p provided that all states and the accelerations can be measured. In a compact form, this implies :

3.

of the SCARA O

This simulation is concern mainly with the problem of computing the joints positions, velocities and accelerations given the applied torques. This problem consists in solving the following equation

Since ( M - 2 V d is skew-symmetric, the quadratic form e t ( M - 2 V d e is equal to zero, therefore :

1 Me = etvM et
2

(14)

and

. ..
in order to find the vectors knowing the vector z. The solution of this system of non linear differential equations can be obtained by different methods. Most of these methods have either a slow convergence or a high risk of instability. The Pachner's predictor-corrector technique [5] has been adopted because it presents both stability and fast convergence characteristics. The main feature of this technique is the introduction of a variable step size determined at each stem
4 . Adaptive cont roller des'lU
= et (Me - MeR + v

~ -e V$R) + F t r l

( 1 6)

Taking into account equation ( l ) , it follows :

i r ( t ) = e t ( z - ~ ~ e - ~ - ~ e ~ - ~ ~ e R ) + F (17) t tr-'

Introducing the control law,

i22nmAu
The control algorithm is derived from the following Lyapunov function :
(8)

where Kd is a symmetric positive definite matrix. This control law consists in a PD controller plus feedforward of full dynamics (fig 2). Note . . that in equations 17 and 18, the viscous frictions terms are expressed as a matrix instead of a vector.
ir(t) = e t ( ~ i R v M ~ R + G + 9 M i R - F +
M ~ &e) -

where e is a state error vector defined as

+ Ftr-l

considering
. .

i R = i d - de - ed), we get

where

V M =?M

- VM

is a 9x1 vector of the parameters pi estimation errors

FM=FM - FM

-= P - i ; P

(11)

i3=8-G

(20d)

is a weighting matrix which is symmetric, constant and positive definite. Clearly v(t) is positive definite, then

Further, since the dynamic equation is linear in terms of the parameters pi

416

which suggests the adaptation law

Piaital simulation resulk The adaptive controller has been simulated using PC-MATLAB. The SCARA dynamics simulator of section 3 has been integrated as a subroutine (MEX file) into the PC-MATLAB based control system. A fifth-order polynomial in joint space was used to generate the reference trajectories. The joints move from (-900, -900, 0, -900) to (+goo, +goo, 100mm, +goo) in 1.25s with a peak velocity of 27001s and a peak acceleration of 6 6 4 0 1 ~ 2for the three revolute joints. A second period of 1.25s follows with the reference values being held constant to show the regulation performances of the controller. The desired position trajectory is shown in Fig. 3.
2

Equation (23) shows that when this adaptation law is adopted then:

therefore the adaptive scheme is stable, moreover +(t)=O implies that e = 0, recalling equation (9):
e = 0 + h) 0 =
A -

the

only solution of this diffezntial equation is 0 = 0 given the initial condition 0 = 0 or e(0)=e@). The physical meaning of this is that the system will come at rest only when the tracking error has been cancelled out.

-0 5
-1
-1.5

I 4 l l I
on l a u

-2'

10

20

30

40

50

GO

70

80

90

100

TI

Fig. 3 Desired position trajectory The following values for the feedback matrix and the weighting matrices r a n d h were found to give good results:

Fig. 2 Block-diagram of the adaptive controller

& = diag (70,32,20,5)

The adaptation law (equation 24) specifies the way to update the estimates of the manipulator parameters. Note that
W*W ( @ , e0~~ 0,) implies that only the reference ,

(28a)

accelerations must be known not the true accelerations. The vector p contains manipulator parameters that are unknown but constant. These parameters change only occasionally when the load is changed. The matrix W contains other manipulator parameters that are time-varying but measurable. For the SCARA, the matrix W is:
0

Unfortunately, the feedback matrix cannot be calculated by a convenient design method such as pole placement because the close-loop dynamics given by
h E + (VM+ FM+ K& =* 4

(29)

0 0 0

0
0 0 0

OS(c;iutS2i,iln)

'& t 'ill
0

W=

ba-g
0
0 0
LE

is of no use, the parameter estimation error being unknown. It can be seen in fig. 4, 5 and 6 that the maximum tracking errors are 0.84' and -0.2', 0.24' and - . 7 , 3.6' and -0.63' respectively for axe 1, 05'
417

. &a
0

( ..ill. '& t &)

0
0 0
eau

ii,
0 0

2 and 4. These results were obtained with initial values of the manipulator parameters p set to about half the exact values. It must be pointed out that the adaptation law (eq. 24) is not guaranteed to converge to the real parameters values however it guarantees that the steady state position errors will be zero.

5. Time-Varvina Derivate Gain Matrix

In the previous section, the derivate gain matrix was held constant. An alternative approach is to use a time-varying matrix Kd (t) such that :

the reason for this choice becomes obvious when considering the control law (eq. 18) :

10

20

30

40

50

61)

70

80

YO

100

The stability of this new control law is assured by considering the same Lyapunov function as before (eq. 8), its time derivate becomes :

Fig. 4 Tracking error with constant Kd (joint 1)

. . ..
de.e.eR,BR) Next the matrix rewritten in order to satisfy :
2(&-Ae)

must

be

+VM& +&&

+G=w(e,

e,e~,&)?(34)

this gives

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Fig. 5 Tracking error with constant Kd (joint 2)

Equation 36 shows that with the same adaptation law obtained previously (eq. 24), the stability and the tracking convergence are assured since +(t) = - e ( m +F& 20 (37) al Stmraljbtion results In section 4.3, the feedback matrix Kd had to be determined experimentally. Hence, in order to simplify, this matrix was considered to be diagonal although this choice did not result in the best tracking performances. In the present section, the burden of choosing values for the feedback matrix is avoided without increasing the complexity of the control law. Moreover the tracking performances of the controller are seen to be improved slightly. The following values for the weighting matrices r a n d A were found to give good results :
418

Fig. 6 Tracking error with constant Kd (joint 4)

In fig. 4, 5, 6 and 7, 8, 9 tracking errors are in degree. Time axis is scaled in sampling period T = 25 ms.

A = diag (10,10,10,10)

r = diag (1 0, 10,10,lO)
It can be seen in fig. 7, 8, 9 that the maximum tracking errors are +1.02' and -0.03', + 0.16' and 0.37' , + 3.9' and - . ' respectively for axe 1, 2 05 and 4.
1

.z
1

08

0. C

It has been shown by simulation that the proposed adaptive scheme gives excellent tracking performances when applied to a 4 d.0.f. SCARA robot. This is due to the fact that the full dynamics of the SCARA have been taken into account in the control law although only a rough a priori knowledge of the manipulator parameters is required by the adaptation law. Again, it must be emphazed that the only concern of the adaptation law is that the tracking errors converge to zero by "direct adaptation" of the control law. However, it is not guarantee that it converges to the real values of the manipulator parameters. Despite the relative complexity of this direct adaptive scheme, its real time implementation which will be reported later is easy because it resumes to the on-line execution of only equations 24 and 18 (constant Kd) or 32 (time-varying Kd).

04

0.2

c
-0 ;

Fig. 7 Tracking error with time-varying Kd (joint 1)

SCARA dynamics

Mass Matrix

Fig. 8 Tracking error with time-varying Kd (joint 2)

m22 =

C I + m2x3 + a$ (m3 + m4)

2

Coriolis and centrifugal terms

Fig. 9 Tracking error with time-varying Kd (joint 4)

419

where

a l , a2 : lenght of arms 1 and 2.

XI, : center of mass of arms 1 and 2. x2

REFERENCES

PI

M.Nakao, K. Ohnishi and K. Miyachi, "A Robust Decentralized Joint Control Based on Proceedings IEE E Inte rfe rence Estimatio n International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Vol 1, pp. 326-331, 1987.
'I,

121 J.J. Craig, "Adaptive Control of Mechanical Manipulations", Addison-Wesley, 1988. 131 J.J.E. Slotine and W. Li, "Adaptive Manipulator Control: A Case Study", IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, Vol. 33, No. 11, Nov. 1988. 141 H.R. Asare and D.G. Wilson, "Design of Computed Torque Model Reference Adaptive Control for Space-Based Robotic Manipulators", ASME 1986 WAM, p.195-204.

151 J. Pachner, "Handbook of Numerical Analysis Applications:' McGraw-Hill, 1984.

420