Mechanism and Machine Theory 34 (1999) 801824

A general strategy based on the NewtonEuler approach

for the dynamic formulation of parallel manipulators
Bhaskar Dasgupta a,*, Prasun Choudhury b
a
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur 208 016, India
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Northwestern University, 2145 Sheridan Ave, Evanston, IL 60208, USA

Received 6 June 1997; received in revised form 31 August 1998; accepted 3 September 1998

Abstract
This paper presents a general strategy based on the NewtonEuler approach to the dynamic
formulation of parallel manipulators. It is shown that, for parallel manipulators, through appropriate
selection and ordering of the equilibrium equations, the NewtonEuler method can be used with
advantage not only for inverse dynamics computations, but also for the derivation of dynamic equations
in closed form. The proposed strategy has been illustrated through its application to several planar and
spatial manipulators. Cases of parallel manipulators requiring particular considerations are also
discussed with recommendations of special measures to be taken in dierent classied cases. # 1998
Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
EulerLagrange formulation and NewtonEuler formulation are the two broadly adopted
approaches for dynamic analysis of robot manipulators. In the EulerLagrange approach, the
complete physical description of the manipulator is rst incorporated in the Lagrangian in
terms of a set of generalized coordinates and velocities, and then a systematic procedure is
followed to develop the Lagrangian equations of motion. On the other hand, in the Newton
Euler approach, Newton's law and Euler's equation for linear and angular motion are directly
applied to individual bodies. It is held that the NewtonEuler approach is numerically ecient
so far as inverse dynamics computation is concerned and the EulerLagrange approach is
* Corresponding author. Tel.: + + 91-512-597095; fax: + + 91-512-590260.
E-mail address: dasgupta@iitk.ac.in (B. Dasgupta)
0094-114X/99/$ - see front matter # 1998 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 0 9 4 - 1 1 4 X ( 9 8 ) 0 0 0 8 1 - 0

802

B. Dasgupta, P. Choudhury / Mechanism and Machine Theory 34 (1999) 801824

better suited for the derivation of closed-form dynamic equations of the system (see p. 142 of
Fu et al. [1], for example). While the above statement is by and large true for conventional
serial manipulators, the case of parallel manipulators warrants closer exploration in this
regard. The kinematics and dynamics of parallel manipulators show signicant contrasts to
that of serial manipulators (see Waldron and Hunt [2] for an elegant description) and often
necessitate radical departures from conventional methods for their analysis as discussed by
Dasgupta [3]. Again, joint variables appear as the natural choice for generalized coordinates in
the case of serial manipulators while the actuated joint variables are not enough for complete
description of parallel manipulators. In the case of parallel manipulators, a joint-space
formulation leads to a system of dierential algebraic equations involving Lagrange multipliers.
The computations of Lagrange multipliers in the inverse dynamics can be avoided by the
method of Nakamura and Ghodoussi [4], but it involves the so-called virtual actuations (in lieu
of Lagrange multipliers) which have to be eliminated for developing the closed-form dynamic
equations. Comparatively, it is generally easier to derive the dynamic equations of parallel
manipulators in the task-space.
In the tutorial on the NewtonEuler method for derivation of closed-form dynamic
equations of serial manipulators, Driels et al. [5] observed that ``as the complexity of the robot
model increases, the NE method becomes a viable competitor with Lagrangian methods for
closed-form equation generation''. This fact is more apparent in the case of a parallel
manipulator, the Lagrangian of which is very complicated. So far as the NewtonEuler method
is concerned, the only major diculty in the derivation of closed-form dynamic equations is in
the elimination of the joint reactions, as mentioned by Kane and Levinson [6]. However,
contrary to the view expressed in [6], the application of the NewtonEuler approach is more
economical in the case of parallel (or hybrid) manipulators than in serial manipulators, as
shown in the present paper. The idea is to reduce the computational burden by a selective
consideration of equilibrium equations such that many of the joint reactions never come into
picture and others are eliminated by taking the appropriate components of forces/torques in a
manner similar to the method of Sugimoto [7] by the orthogonalization of screws.
First of all, it is noted that, for parallel and closed-loop manipulators, development of
dynamic equations is more straightforward in task-space than in joint-space. Secondly,
Newton's law and Euler's equation can be directly applied in an economical way in the sense
that only those equilibrium equations of individual bodies need to be considered which
contribute in relating the end-eector motion to the actuation forces and torques. In view of
these two aspects, the NewtonEuler method has been recently applied to a few specic
parallel manipulators [810] with signicant advantage. The present paper focuses on the
dynamic analysis of parallel manipulators in general by the NewtonEuler approach through
the generalization of the above-mentioned strategy and enumerates systematic guidelines for
both the inverse dynamics problem and the derivation of closed-form dynamic equations.
Although these two procedures use the same set of equations, the two strategies dier from
each other in the sense that for inverse dynamics all accelerations are determined from the
(known) acceleration components of the end-eector, while for derivation of closed-from
dynamic equations they are evaluated as linear functions of the (unknown) acceleration
components of the end-eector. Although the inverse dynamics also can be solved from the
dynamic equations, it is noticed that the alternative suggested results in a computationally

B. Dasgupta, P. Choudhury / Mechanism and Machine Theory 34 (1999) 801824

803

ecient scheme. The above procedure has been applied to a few parallel and hybrid
manipulators to demonstrate the versatility of the approach.
In the next section, the salient features of the proposed strategy and the algorithmic steps
are outlined. In Section 3, the considerations necessary in various cases of robot architectures
are recommended. In Sections 4 and 5, the application of the method is illustrated by various
planar and spatial examples. Finally, in the last section, the work presented in the paper is
summarized with a discussion on the scope and applicability of the proposed method.
2. The dynamic formulation strategy
The NewtonEuler method of dynamic formulation is based on the direct application of
Newton's law and Euler's equation in the form
X
F ma
1
and

a o  Io
o
r  F rcg  ma Ia

to individual bodies. This yields six scalar equations for each body. The subject matter of this
section is the set of principles for selection and ordering of the appropriate equations for
various bodies in order to relate the end-eector acceleration components to the actuator
forces/torques for parallel manipulators.
A parallel robot manipulator is one which has its end-eector (platform) connected to the
frame (base) through a number of partially actuated kinematic chains (legs) in-parallel. A
parallel manipulator in the strict sense would have a single actuation in each leg. Similar
manipulators with more than one actuations in a leg, in fact, constitute a sub-class of hybrid
manipulators, but can be analyzed by the methods pertaining to parallel manipulators.
In the case of open-chain serial manipulators, the conguration can be completely described
in terms of the actuated joint variables and the direct kinematics is straightforward and unique.
This makes the joint-space formulation attractive for the dynamics of serial manipulators. On
the other hand, the direct kinematics of parallel manipulators is found to be quite complicated
with possibilities of branching. Therefore, a joint-space formulation of dynamics is both
complicated and undesirable for parallel manipulators. For parallel manipulators, the inverse
kinematics is comparatively simpler which makes task-space dynamic formulation appropriate.
In this paper, the dynamic formulation of parallel manipulators is considered in task-space.
The salient features and steps of the strategy are described in the following.
2.1. Decoupling of the legs
For a task-space dynamic formulation, the aim is to develop the equations of motion
(namely, Newton's and Euler's equations) for the platform. For writing these equations, the
forces/torques exerted by the legs on the platform appear as unknowns. Thus, it is necessary to
analyze each leg with the intent to evaluate its contribution to the force system acting on the

804

B. Dasgupta, P. Choudhury / Mechanism and Machine Theory 34 (1999) 801824

platform in terms of the actuation(s) in that leg. The rst step in the strategy is to determine
the position, velocity and acceleration of the platform-connection-point of each leg in terms of
the task-space coordinates and their derivatives. Once this is done, each leg gets decoupled
from the rest of the system and its kinematics and dynamics have to be analyzed for its
reaction at the platform-connection-point.
2.2. Kinematics and dynamics of a leg
From the position, velocity and acceleration of the platform-connection-point, the
kinematics of the leg is solved up to the evaluation of the linear acceleration of the centres of
gravity and the angular accelerations of all the links in the leg. In addition, from the
conguration of the leg, the moment of inertia of each link is transformed to the global basis.
The next step is to consider the dynamics of the leg and to select the appropriate
components from the equilibrium equations. At this point, let us assume that the number of
task-space coordinates is equal to the number of degrees of freedom of the manipulator and
also equal to the DOF's allowed to the platform by each leg. Let us call this situation the
``standard'' case1 of parallel manipulators. Then, the number of reaction components at the
platform-connection-point will be the same as the number of freedoms available in the leg
(except those at the platform-connection), i.e. number of task-space coordinates less the
degrees of freedom of the platform-connection. For example, in a 6-DOF standard parallel
manipulator with spherical joint at the platform-connection-point, there will be three
components of force (and no moment) reaction and the leg should have joints giving a total of
three degrees of freedom.
From the above, it is apparent that considering only those components of equilibrium
equations where freedom is available is sucient to determine the reaction of the leg to the
platform in terms of the actuations in the leg. First, the equilibrium of the most distal (farthest
from the base) link is considered and the forces or moments (or a combination, as the case
may be) on it along the screw of freedom available at the preceding joint are equilibrated.
Examples of various choices depending upon the preceding joint are as follows:
1. Prismatic joint: force equilibrium along the sliding directionone scalar equation.
2. Revolute joint: moment equilibrium about the revolute axisone scalar equation.
3. Screw joint: appropriate linear combination of force and moment equilibrium along and
about the screw axisone scalar equation.
4. Cylindrical joint: force equilibrium along the joint axis and moment equilibrium about it
two independent scalar equations.
5. Universal joint: moment equilibrium about both the axes of freedomtwo independent
scalar equations
6. Spherical joint: moment equilibriuma vector equation with three independent scalar
components.

Measures to be taken in ``non-standard'' cases will be discussed in Section 3

B. Dasgupta, P. Choudhury / Mechanism and Machine Theory 34 (1999) 801824

805

Next, the combined equilibrium of the farthest and the penultimate links is considered and the
equation(s) involving components corresponding to the joint preceding the penultimate link is/
are retained. Repeating this procedure, at the nal step, the equilibrium of the entire leg is
considered and component(s) corresponding to the freedom allowed by the base joint is/are
taken. Thus, we get exactly the requisite number of equations necessary for solving the reaction
components at the platform-connection in terms of the actuator force/torques. These equations
are solved, either together or in some preferred order (depending upon the manipulator
structure), and the reaction at the platform-connection-point is determined. It is to be noted
that the above method ensures that the reactions of the joints in the leg are automatically
eliminated from these equations.
2.3. Algebraic manipulations for standard expressions
The above exercise often results in complicated expressions involving the quantity X,
representing platform acceleration, in multiple products of vectors in various terms. For inverse
dynamics computations, where X is known, the expressions can be evaluated numerically at
each step and the nal expression for the reaction of the leg to the platform is easily obtained
in the form
_ X

F hXtt cX,X,

For the purpose of deriving the dynamic equations in closed form, however, X is to be treated
as unknown and all the terms involving X have to be clubbed in the form QX, where Q is a
matrix of appropriate dimension. For this purpose, apart from the usual operations of vector
algebra, the following two working rules will be used for correspondence between vector
algebra and matrix notations.
Rule I. With arbitrary vectors a and b,

 baT X

 bb a
X
 b aT X
a
X
Rule II. With arbitrary vector a, for planar systems (X$R 2)
 a1 X 2 a2 X 1 a2
aX

 aT X

a1 X
?

where a_ is the vector obtained by rotating vector a by a right angle in anticlockwise (positive)
sense; and for spatial system (X $R 3)
 a~ X

aX
where

806

B. Dasgupta, P. Choudhury / Mechanism and Machine Theory 34 (1999) 801824

0
4
a~
a3
a2

a3
0
a1

3
a2
a1 5
0

is the skew symmetric matrix corresponding to the vector a.

Using these rules in the dynamic equations and carrying out the necessary algebraic
manipulations, the reaction of the leg to the platform can be expressed in the form
 VX,X
_
F hXtt QXX

2.4. Kinematics and dynamics of the platform

After the expressions for the reactions of the legs2 are developed, the equilibrium of the
platform is considered and dynamic equations for the platform are written. These equations
now relate the actuator forces/torques to the platform acceleration. In inverse dynamics
computations, using Eq. (3), all the actuator forces/torques can be solved from a linear system.
On the other hand, for developing closed-form dynamic equations, Eq. (4) can be used to
develop the complete dynamic equation of the system in task-space in the form
 Z X,X
_ HXtt RExt
MXX

where
M Mplat

X
legs

Mleg

and Z Z plat

X
legs

Z leg

incorporate the contributions from all the legs as well as from the platform. The force
transformation matrix H transforms the actuator forces/torques to task-space while RExt is the
external force system acting from the environment on the platform (end-eector).
2.5. Summary
The steps involved in the proposed strategy of dynamic formulation can be summarized as
below.
1. For each leg,
1.1. Find the position, velocity and acceleration of the platform-connection-point from (or
in terms of) the task-space coordinates and their derivatives.
1.2. Solve the kinematics of the leg for position, velocity and acceleration.
1.3. Let m be number of links in series in the leg. Let l1, l2, . . . ,lm denote the m links and j1,
2

Analysis for all legs can be performed in parallel due to the decoupling of legs from one another.

B. Dasgupta, P. Choudhury / Mechanism and Machine Theory 34 (1999) 801824

807

j2, . . . ,jm denote the joints, starting from the base. Then, for i=1m, consider the
equilibrium of links lmi+1 to lm and take its component(s) corresponding to the
freedom(s) allowed by joint jmi+1.
1.4. From the equations obtained above, solve the reaction at the platform-connection-point
in terms of the actuation(s) in the leg (for inverse dynamics) or express the reaction in
terms of the actuations and the platform accelerations X (for deriving closed-form
dynamic equations).
2. Consider equilibrium of the platform and write Newton's and Euler's equations for it. Solve
the actuator forces/torques from these equations (for inverse dynamics) or simplify the
equations to the standard form (resulting in the closed-form dynamic equations).
Two parallel strategies for inverse dynamics and for deriving closed-form dynamic equations
based on the same theme have been described above. This might seem redundant because the
inverse dynamics can be solved from the dynamic equations also. However, it should be noted
that, compared with deriving the equations in closed form and then using them, following the
direct strategy turns out to be signicantly economical for the inverse dynamics problem. In
the examples presented in the paper, however, only the derivation of closed-form dynamic
equations will be demonstrated for the sake of brevity and the inverse dynamics problem will
not be pursued separately.

3. Various standard and non-standard cases

In the above, we designated as the ``standard'' case the situation in which the number of
task-space coordinates is the same as the number of degrees of freedom of each leg. When the
task-space coordinates are greater or lesser in number, we have ``non-standard'' cases that
warrant special considerations for dynamic formulation. Even in ``standard'' cases, there are
dierent situations due to the possible hybrid nature of the manipulator or due to redundancy.
Although all standard cases can be modeled by the strategy as explained in Section 2, without
any modication, the form of the resulting system of equations may vary from case to case. All
these standard and non-standard cases are briey discussed in the following. Combinations of
various cases are also possible where measures necessary for individual cases taken together
will suce to yield a complete and consistent modeling.
3.1. Ordinary non-redundant parallel manipulators
This is the simplest case of parallel manipulators where (1) number of task-space coordinates
(n ) is the same as the number of degrees of freedom of the manipulator and also as the
number of legs, and (2) each leg has n degrees of freedom exactly one of which is actuated.
Examples of this case are ve-bar 2-DOF manipulators, the eight-bar 3-DOF manipulators and
the Stewart platform with six UPS (universalprismaticspherical) legs. The resulting system
of dynamic equations (Eq. (5)) will have a square H matrix with one column per leg (i.e. per
actuation). Although this is a standard case and the so-called simplest one so far as the

808

B. Dasgupta, P. Choudhury / Mechanism and Machine Theory 34 (1999) 801824

formulation is concerned, the equations can turn out to be quite complicated depending upon
the kinematic structures of the legs. Legs comprising of fewer links (and hence multi-DOF
joints) facilitate the application of the NewtonEuler formulation. In the most complicated
cases, for example 6-DOF parallel manipulator with six 6R legs, the NewtonEuler method
will have marginal or no advantage over the EulerLagrange method so far as derivation of
closed-form dynamic equations is concerned. The task-space analysis, however, will still retain
the advantage.
3.2. Hybrid manipulators
The complete class of hybrid manipulators is quite wide with numerous possibilities of
kinematic structures and is beyond the scope of the present paper. However, platform
manipulators with multiple actuations in at least one leg constitute a sub-class of hybrid
manipulators and can be analyzed by the methods for analysis of parallel manipulators.
Examples of such hybrid manipulators are the single-loop six-bar 3-DOF planar manipulator
discussed in Section 4 and the two three-legged (3-PRPS and 3-RRRS) manipulators discussed
in Section 5. These also are standard cases for the proposed method and no special measure is
necessary. However, task-space formulation has reduced advantage in these manipulators. With
fewer legs and more number of actuations in individual legs, joint-space analysis may become
competitive and in the extreme case, i.e. completely serial manipulator, joint-space analysis is
ideal.
3.3. Manipulators with static redundancy
Redundant manipulators are characterized by more number of actuations than degrees of
freedom. If the platform is supported by more number of (actuated) legs than necessary, we
have static redundancy. The concept of static redundancy in parallel manipulators and its role
in singularity reduction has been detailed by Dasgupta and Mruthyunjaya [11]. Examples of
statically redundant parallel manipulators can be the four-legged 3-DOF planar parallel
manipulator or a seven-legged version of the Stewart platform. These are also examples of
standard cases for the proposed method with force transformation matrix H being rectangular
to accommodate the redundant actuation and the summation for M and Z being carried over
all the legs. In case the redundant leg is not actuated (kept free), the matrix H can be made
square, although the dynamic terms (M and Z) have to account for the unactuated leg(s) also.
3.4. Manipulators with actuation redundancy
Parallel manipulators can have actuation redundancy if some of the passive joints are
replaced by active ones. For example, the ve-bar 2-DOF manipulator discussed in Section 4
can be made to have actuation redundancy by providing actuations to both the joints in one
(or both) of the legs. This is also a standard case and modeling is similar to the case of hybrid
manipulators, although the H matrix in the nal system turns out to be rectangular.

B. Dasgupta, P. Choudhury / Mechanism and Machine Theory 34 (1999) 801824

809

3.5. Manipulators with kinematic redundancy

Kinematically redundant parallel (rather hybrid) manipulators constitute a non-standard
case for the proposed strategy. They are characterized by one or more of the legs having more
degrees of freedom than the number of task-space coordinates with additional actuator(s) as
well. For example, replacing one of the legs of the 3-RRRS manipulator by an RRRRS leg
and actuating three of the revolute joints will introduce kinematic redundancy in that leg. Such
redundancy can be useful in avoiding kinematic singularities, obstacles or interference of legs.
In such situations, the task-space coordinates alone cannot describe the conguration
completely due to the innite possible congurations of the redundant leg(s). To apply the
NewtonEuler method to such a manipulator, from each kinematically redundant leg,
additional joint variables (equal in number to the degree of redundancy) can be included in the
set of generalized coordinates and the steps in the procedure will automatically generate an
equal number of additional equations. The nal system of dynamic equations can be expressed
in a partitioned form as
  
 





Hx
RExt
Zx
Mxx Mxy
X

t
6

Myx Myy
Zy
Hy
0
y
where X and y consist of task-space variables and additional joint-space variables, respectively.
3.6. Manipulators with passive freedom
Legs of a parallel manipulator can have passive degrees of freedom which do not contribute
to kinematic/static relationships, but do aect the dynamics through inertia coupling, coriolis
and gravity terms. A good example of this case is the Stewart platform with SPS legs, i.e. legs
with spherical joints at both the base and the platform, giving the passive freedom of axial
rotation of legs. Such manipulators exhibit a non-standard case and can be tackled by the
proposed strategy by including additional coordinates corresponding to the passive freedoms in
the set of generalized coordinates. Since dynamic analysis of a leg is performed by the method
on the basis of joint freedoms, additional dynamic equations corresponding to these freedoms
are generated as a matter of routine procedure. The nal system of equations can be arranged
in the form
  
 
 



Zx
Mxx Mxf
Hx t
RExt
X

7
Zf
Mfx Mff
0
0
F
In fact, this non-standard case can be considered as a sub-case of kinematically redundant one
with the redundant actuation nally set to zero.
3.7. Manipulators with inadequate actuations
When the degrees of freedom allowed to the platform through legs is less than the natural
dimension of the task-space, the degrees of freedom of the manipulator is still lesser and the
actuators are unable to give arbitrary motion to the platform. Although a set of coordinates

B. Dasgupta, P. Choudhury / Mechanism and Machine Theory 34 (1999) 801824

810

out of the natural task-space variables can be chosen for control as the ``output'', these
coordinates cannot describe the platform pose completely. The 3-RPS parallel manipulator
discussed in Section 5 is an example of this case. The ve-bar 2-DOF manipulators discussed
in Section 4 also will fall under this case if a point on any of the distal links other than their
connection-point is considered as the output, thereby making the orientation also necessary to
determine the connection-point in terms of the task-space variables. In such a case, the
dynamic analysis of a leg does not yield all the reaction components at the platformconnection. The required number of equations are, however, found by considering the
equilibrium of the platform. The resulting system turns out to be a system of dierential
algebraic equations with constraints on the legs.
4. Planar manipulators
In this section, the dynamic formulation strategy is illustrated with two rudimentary planar
manipulators, namely ve-bar 2-DOF manipulators with prismatic and revolute actuations. In
addition, 3-DOF planar manipulators are also discussed in brief.
4.1. Five-bar with prismatic actuations
The ve-bar mechanism shown in Fig. 1 is a 2-DOF regional manipulator with the endeector at point ``p'', the position of which is denoted by t and gives the generalized
coordinates. In this case, as the output-point itself is the platform-connection-point (for the
point-platform), the analysis starts with the legs. For each of the legs, denoting the leg vector,
leg length and unit vector along the leg by S, L and s, respectively (omitting the leg-index for
convenience), the position kinematics yields
S t b;

L kS k; s S=L

Fig. 1. Five-bar with prismatic actuations.

B. Dasgupta, P. Choudhury / Mechanism and Machine Theory 34 (1999) 801824

811

From this, the centres of gravity of the lower and upper parts of the leg are transformed to a
xed frame at the base point parallel to the global frame and are denoted by rd and ru.
The sliding velocity at the prismatic joint and the angular velocity of the entire leg are given
by
L_ s
_t ; W s?
_t =L
where the subscript _ denotes anticlockwise rotation of a vector through a right angle.
Acceleration analysis of the leg gives the sliding acceleration at the prismatic joint and the
angular acceleration of the entire leg as
L s
t W 2 L

and
A

1
s?
t 2WL_
L

From this the accelerations of the centres of gravity of the lower and upper links are given by
ad Ard? W 2 rd

10

 Aru? W 2 ru 2LWs
_
au Ls
?

11

To get the reaction forces at the output point, we rst consider the force balance of the
upper part of the leg in the direction of the leg and thereafter take into account the moment
equilibrium of the entire leg about the base point yielding the required equilibrium equations
as
mu s
g au f Fa

12

mu ru  g md rd  g mu ru  au md rd  ad Iu Id A LFp

13

and

where Fa and Fp denote the components along and perpendicular to the leg respectively, while
f is the actuation force at the prismatic joint.
The resultant reaction force is expressed as
F Fa s Fp s?
which upon substitution from Eqs. (12) and (13) and simplication yields
F f s Qt U
where
Q mu ssT

a1
mu ru  s T
ss? s? sT
s? sT?
2
L
L

14

B. Dasgupta, P. Choudhury / Mechanism and Machine Theory 34 (1999) 801824

812

and


_ u  s
2mu WLr
U mu s
g mu W s
r u mu W L
s
L
2



1
2a1 WL_
2
_
mu W Lru  s 2mu WLs
ru s?
mu ru  g md rd  g
L
L
in which
a1 mu r2u md r2d Iu Id
To arrive at the nal equations of motion, we consider the force balance at the output
platform (which, in this case, is a point) and, using the leg index i as subscript for i-th leg, get
the equation
2
X

Fi RExt 0

i1

or,
Mt Z Hf RExt
P
P
where M 2i1 Qi ; Z 2i1 Ui ;

15
H s1

s2 and f f1

f2 T :

4.2. Five-bar with revolute actuations

The ve-bar 2-DOF manipulator with revolute actuations is shown in Fig. 2 (leg details
shown in only one leg). With the previous notation for the leg vector and denoting the lengths
of the lower and upper links by l and u respectively, the position kinematics of a single leg

Fig. 2. Five-bar with revolute actuations.

B. Dasgupta, P. Choudhury / Mechanism and Machine Theory 34 (1999) 801824

813

gives
S t b;

L kS k; s S=L

c tan1 Sy =Sx ;

b cos1

l 2 L2 u2
;
2lL

y c2b

unit vectors c and d along the lower and upper links obtained from


cos y
c
; j b lc; d t j=u
sin y
and
f tan1 dy =dx
Angular velocities of the lower and upper links are given by
" #
y_
_
A1
1 t
f_
where

l siny
A1
l cosy

u sinf
u cosf

and the linear velocity of the intermediate joint is

_j lc? y_
After carrying out the acceleration analysis, the angular accelerations of the two links are
given by
" #
y

16
A1
1 t V0
f
and the nal expressions for the accelerations of the centres of gravity for the respective lower
and upper links are given by
ad
and

rd? dT 
t Vd
l sinf y



1
1
T
T 
c? d ru? c t Vu
au
sinf y
u

17

18

where rd and ru denote the vector from the base point to the cg (centre of gravity) of the lower

B. Dasgupta, P. Choudhury / Mechanism and Machine Theory 34 (1999) 801824

814

link and that from the intermediate joint to the cg of the upper links, respectively, and
2
2
V0 ly_ c uf_ d

Vd

rd? dT V0
2
rd y_
l sinf y

Vu

c? dT V0
2
2
ru? cT V0
y_ lc ru f_
sinf y
u sinf y

Now, coming to the dynamic analysis of the leg, we rst consider the moment equilibrium of
the upper link about the point j and thereafter we take into account the moment equilibrium
of both the links as a whole. This gives rise to two equations, namely
udT? F mu rTu? g au I u f

19

ST? F mu lc ru T? g au md rTd? g ad I d y I u f t

20

and

where F denotes the reaction force exerted by the leg at output point and t gives the input
torque.
These two equations can be solved together for F and we get
F

1
td Qt U
l sinf y

21

where



1
l
u
Q
mu l ddT u crTu? c? dT dcT? ru? cT mu r2u Iu ccT md r2d
2
u
l
lu sin f y


T
Id dd

G mu l udcT? crTu? md udrTd?

V mu l udcT? crTu? Vu md udrTd? Vd

U

I du
I ul
ddT V0
ccT V0
l sinf y
u sinf y

Gg V
lu sinf y

Proceeding in a manner similar to the previous mechanism, we get the nal equations of
motion by considering the force balance of the output point and the closed-form equations are

B. Dasgupta, P. Choudhury / Mechanism and Machine Theory 34 (1999) 801824

815

derived in the form

Mt Z Htt RExt

22

where
M

2
X
i1

Qi ; Z

2
X
i1

d1
d2
Ui ; H
l1 sinf1 y1 l2 sinf2 y2


and t t1

t2

T

4.3. Three-DOF planar parallel manipulators

Three-degree-of-freedom planar parallel manipulators have been studied extensively in
literature. Dynamic formulation of the eight-bar 3-DOF parallel manipulator (shown in Fig.
3a) and that of a similar manipulator with revolute actuations have been reported by Revathi
et al. [12] and by Ma and Angeles [13], respectively. The present method can be applied to
both the cases as well as to a manipulator with dierent types of legs. Adding a fourth leg in

Fig. 3. Three-DOF planar parallel manipulators.

816

B. Dasgupta, P. Choudhury / Mechanism and Machine Theory 34 (1999) 801824

parallel results in a statically redundant manipulator (Fig. 3b). For all these manipulators, the
previously described procedures have to be applied to evaluate the reaction forces at the
platform point. After evaluating the reaction forces at the platform connection points, the
force and moment equilibrium of the platform is considered to arrive at the nal dynamic
equations. Due to space limitations, the detailed analysis of these manipulators are not
presented here and the same can be found in Choudhury [14].
A single-loop six-bar mechanism (with the link farthest from the base as output) is an
example of a planar hybrid manipulator with two legs, one having two actuations and the
other having one. The analysis is similar to the above manipulators and the derivation of the
dynamic equations for this is also reported by Choudhury [14].
5. Spatial manipulators
The application of the method to a few spatial manipulators is shown in the following. First,
a brief outline is given for the 6-DOF fully parallel manipulator called the Stewart platform
followed by examples of two hybrid manipulators, namely 3-PRPS and 3-RRRS manipulators.
The 3-DOF 3-RPS manipulator also has been included as an example of a ``non-standard''
case.
5.1. The Stewart platform
The Stewart platform (see Fig. 4), with its multi-DOF joints and very simple inverse
kinematics, is one of the ideal manipulators for the present strategy of dynamic formulation.
Consideration of force balance of the upper part of a leg in the direction of the leg yields the
component of the leg reaction force (at the platform-connection-point) along that direction in
terms of the actuator force. Next, the moment balance of the entire leg is considered and the
components perpendicular to the leg are separated out (through cross product with the unit

Fig. 4. Six UPS Stewart platform.

B. Dasgupta, P. Choudhury / Mechanism and Machine Theory 34 (1999) 801824

817

vector along the leg) giving the rest of the reaction components at the platform-connectionpoint. Finally, consideration of the platform equilibrium relates the accelerations to the
actuator forces thereby reducing the system of dynamic equations to the nal form, i.e. Eq. (5).
Replacement of the universal joints at the base by spherical joints results in a 12-DOF system
with six passive degrees of freedom. This situation is handled by incorporating the passive
rotations as additional generalized coordinates and the nal system of equations can be derived
in the form of Eq. (7). Details of the dynamic formulation for these two cases of the Stewart
platform are not given here and can be found in Dasgupta and Mruthyunjaya [10].
5.2. 3-PRPS hybrid manipulator
As the next example, let us consider the 6-DOF 3-PRPS hybrid manipulator shown in Fig. 5
which has two prismatic actuations in each leg.
Denoting the leg vector, displacement of the prismatic joint at the base, leg-length and unit
vector along the leg as S, D, L and s, respectively, the position analysis yields
S t q b Dk;

D t q b
k;

L kS k;

s S=L

where q=Rp is the vector from platform origin to platform-connection-point expressed in the
base frame.
Inverse velocity analysis similarly gives the velocity of the platform point and subsequently
the displacement rates of the sliding (actuated) joints and the common angular velocity of
middle and upper parts of the leg as


S_ Dk
_ Ls
_
_ L_ s
S;
_ W
k
S_ _t o  q; D_ k
S;
L

Fig. 5. 3-PRPS spatial manipulator.

B. Dasgupta, P. Choudhury / Mechanism and Machine Theory 34 (1999) 801824

818

Next, for the acceleration analysis, we have

S t a  q o  o
o  q

23

Grouping the terms involving t and a together, we have

S ap u1
where
ap t a  q
From this, we get the accelerations D at the sliding joints and the angular acceleration of
middle and upper parts of the leg as


ks


D k
ap u2 ; L s
ap u3 ; A

ap u4 k
L
where
u2 k
u1 ;

u3 s
u1 LkW k2 ;

u4

kW kL_
ks

u1 2
L
L

Now from these basic equations we can obtain the accelerations of the centres of gravity of
the lower, middle and upper parts.

ad Dk

24

 A  rm W  W  rm
am Dk

25

 Ls
 A  ru W  W  ru 2LW
_ s
au Dk

26

With this background of kinematics, attention is now focussed on the dynamics of the leg.
The reaction force at the spherical joint is primarily resolved into three componentsone
along the leg (Fa), one parallel to the revolute axis (Fk) and the third perpendicular to both the
leg and revolute axis (Fp). Considering force equilibrium of the upper part of the leg in the leg
direction leads to
mu g au
s fs Fa

27

where fs denotes the prismatic actuation along the leg. To get the force Fk we consider the
force equilibrium of the entire leg in the direction of the axis k resulting in
mu g au
k mm g am
k md g ad
k fk Fk

28

where fk denotes the prismatic actuations along the axis k and the subscript ``m'' refers to the
middle link of the leg.
Next, we consider the moment equilibrium of upper and middle parts of the leg about the
axis k. This gives rise to

B. Dasgupta, P. Choudhury / Mechanism and Machine Theory 34 (1999) 801824

k
mu ru  g mm rm  g mu ru  au mm rm  am

819

29

Iu Im A W  Iu Im W LFp
Now we have the reaction force at the platform point to be
F Fa s Fk k Fp n

30

where the vector n = ks is the unit vector normal to both k and s.
After substituting the expressions obtained from kinematic relationship, and simplifying, we
get
F Qap U kfk sfs

31

The expressions for Q and U are given by


mu 
a1
s
k  ru snT nsT mu mm md kkT 2 nnT
Q mu ssT
L
L


h

mu 
s
k  ru u4 s mu mm md k
U mu s
g mu s
W  W  ru mu u3
L


_
W  s

g mu W  W  ru mm W  W  rm md W  W  rd
k 2mu Lk
i

1
mu mm u1 mu k
su3 k mu k
ru  g mm k
rm  g k
W  Iu
L


Im W mu k
ru  su3 a1 u4 n
where
a1 mm k  rm 2 mu k  ru 2 k
Iu Im k
Finally, we consider the force and moment equilibrium of the platform to obtain
3
X


Fi 0
o  R Mp g
Mp t a  R o  o

32

i1

and
3
X


o  R Mp R  g Ip a o  Ip o
qi  Fi 0
Mp R  t a  R o  o

33

i1

Combining the above two equations and including external forces,

 


t
RExt
M
Z HF
MExt
a

34

B. Dasgupta, P. Choudhury / Mechanism and Machine Theory 34 (1999) 801824

820

where
2

3
X

Qi
6 Mp E3
6
i1
6
M6
3
6
X
4
~
q~ i Qi
Mp R
i1

2
6
6
6
Z6
6
4

~
Mp R

3
X

3
Qi q~ i

7
7
7
7
3
7
X
5
2
T
q~ i Qi q~ i
Ip Mp R E3 RR
i1

i1

3

X
Mp o  o
o  R g
Ui
i1
3

X
o  Ip o Mp R  o
o
Ro
o g
q i  Ui

7
7
7
7
7
5

i1

k1
H
q1  k1

fk1

fk2

k2
q2  k2

k3
q3  k3

fk3

fs2

fs1

fs3

s1
q1  s1

s2
q2  s2

s3
q3  s 3

T

Fig. 6. 3-RRRS spatial manipulator.

B. Dasgupta, P. Choudhury / Mechanism and Machine Theory 34 (1999) 801824

821

5.3. 3-RRRS hybrid manipulator

The dynamic formulation of the 3-RRRS hybrid manipulator (see Fig. 6) is conceptually
similar to the 3-PRPS case described above. Here, each of the three legs of the manipulator is
a 3-R serial chain, two of the revolute joints being actuated. Thus, the entire conguration of a
leg can be described in terms of the three joint angles. For the task-space modeling, after
determining the platform point from the task-space coordinates, the inverse kinematics of this
3-R chain has to be carried out for position, velocity and acceleration.
For solving the reaction force at the spherical joint, we need three scalar equations. These
equations are developed by considering the moment equilibrium of the upper link about the
preceding joint axis, the moment equilibrium of the upper and middle links about the axis of
the joint preceding the middle link and the moment equilibrium of the entire leg about the axis
of the base joint. Once the reaction forces of all the three legs are determined, the nal system
of equations can be derived as in the case of 3-PRPS manipulator.
5.4. 3-RPS parallel manipulator
The kinematics of the 3-RPS parallel manipulator, shown in Fig. 7, is quite similar to the 3PRPS case with the only exception that the prismatic actuation at the base will be absent and
there will be only one prismatic actuation, namely that along the direction of the leg. The leg
vector, linear velocity at the prismatic joint and angular velocities of the leg are given by


S_ Ls
_
_ W
k
S t q b; L_ s
S;
L
As this is a 3-DOF mechanism having six output variables, there will be 3 constraint

Fig. 7. 3-RPS spatial manipulator.

B. Dasgupta, P. Choudhury / Mechanism and Machine Theory 34 (1999) 801824

822

equations from the system kinematics. Due to these positional constraints, constraint forces or
``Lagrange Multipliers'' will come into picture and these forces will be essentially in the
direction of the revolute joint axis, along which there is no linear motion. Now, to compute the
reaction forces at the platform point, the same procedure as in the 3-PRPS case will be
followed to evaluate Fa and Fp, while to account for the force parallel to the revolute axes, the
``Lagrange Multiplier'' ( l ) is incorporated and the reaction force is expressed as
F Fa s lk Fp n

35

Finally, the force and moment equilibrium of the platform yields, as in the 3-PRPS case, the
dynamic equations of the system as
 
t
M
Z Hs F Hk l
36
a
Along with these, the constraint equations associated with the system will be
Si
ki 0
where

for i 13

3
X

Qi
6 Mp E3
6
i1
6
M6
3
6
X
4
~
Mp R
Qi q~ i
i1

2
6
6
6
Z6
6
4

37

~
Mp R

3
X

3
Qi q~ i

7
7
7
7
3
7
X
5
2
T
q~ i Qi q~ i
Ip Mp R E3 RR
i1

i1

3

X
Mp o  o
o  R g
Ui
i1
3

X
o  Ip o Mp R  o
o
Ro
o g
q i  Ui
i1


Hs

s1
q1  s1

k1
Hk
q1  k1

F F1

F2

s2
q2  s2
k2
q2  k2
F3

T

s3
q3  s3

k3
q3  k3


and l l1

l2

l3

T

In the above, Q and U for a leg are given by


a1
mu
s
k  ru snT nsT 2 nnT
Q mu ssT
L
L

3
7
7
7
7
7
5

B. Dasgupta, P. Choudhury / Mechanism and Machine Theory 34 (1999) 801824






mu 
1
s
k  ru u4 s mu k
ru  g
U mu s
g mu s
W  W  ru mu u3
L
L



md k
rd  g k
W  Iu Id W mu k
ru  su3 a1 u4 n

823

where a1, u3 and u4 have the same meaning as in the 3-PRPS manipulator.
It can be noticed that, contrary to other examples considered earlier, the dynamic equations
of the 3-RPS parallel manipulator is given by a system of dierential algebraic equations (given
by Eqs. (36) and (37). This is due to the fact that in this case the number of natural task-space
coordinates required to describe the platform is more than the degrees of freedom. Any three
variables out of the six coordinates (three for position and three for orientation) can be chosen
as output, but these output variables cannot serve as a set of generalized coordinates and
Lagrange multipliers become essential for the formulation of the system. A joint-space
formulation of the manipulator also will result in a dierential algebraic system as in Lee and
Shah [15].

6. Conclusions
A dynamic formulation methodology has been developed through the NewtonEuler
approach for deriving closed-form dynamic equations for parallel manipulators. The strategy
presented is well-suited for ecient elimination of constraint reactions in the case of parallel
manipulators and results in a computationally economical procedure for inverse dynamics on
the one hand and a straightforward derivation of dynamic equations on the other. The taskspace formulation adopted is more suited to those manipulators which exhibit simple inverse
kinematics.
The proposed strategy is best applicable in fully parallel manipulators having multi-DOF
passive joints (and, hence less number of links in individual legs). In other cases, say in hybrid
manipulators or manipulators with more complicated legs, its advantage will be less. In fully
serial manipulators, the method will be of little advantage over the EulerLagrange approach.
Architectures of parallel manipulators that need special considerations have been discussed
as non-standard cases and measures have been recommended for their dynamic formulation in
the framework of the proposed strategy. With those special measures, the dynamic modeling of
all platform-type manipulators can be carried out in an economical way. For extension to
more complicated structures of robot manipulators having arbitrary connections of serial and
parallel modules, the strategy will require signicant generalization.

Acknowledgements
Authors wish to thank Professors T. S. Mruthyunjaya and A. Ghosal for their valuable
suggestions and comments.

824

B. Dasgupta, P. Choudhury / Mechanism and Machine Theory 34 (1999) 801824

References
[1] K.S. Fu, R.C. Gonzalez, C.S.G. Lee, Robotics: Control, Sensing, Vision and Intelligence, McGraw Hill, New
York, 1987.
[2] K.J. Waldron, K.H. Hunt, Seriesparallel dualities in actively coordinated mechanisms, International Journal of
Robotics Research 10 (5) (1991) 473480.
[3] B. Dasgupta, The Stewart platform manipulator: dynamic formulation, singularity avoidance and redundancy,
Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, 1996.
[4] Y. Nakamura, M. Ghodoussi, Dynamics computation of closed-link robot mechanisms with non-redundant
and redundant actuators, IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation 5 (3) (1989) 294302.
[5] M.R. Driels, U.J. Fan, U.S. Pathre, The application of NewtonEuler recursive methods to the derivation of
closed form dynamic equations, Journal of Robotic Systems 5 (3) (1988) 229248.
[6] T.R. Kane, D.A. Levinson, The use of Kane's dynamical equations in robotics, International Journal of
Robotics Research 2 (3) (1983) 321.
[7] K. Sugimoto, Computational scheme for dynamic analysis of parallel manipulators, Transactions of the
ASME, Journal of Mechanisms, Transmission and Automation in Design 111 (1989) 2933.
[8] M. Giordano, R. Benea, On the dynamics of a 6-RKS fully-parallel robot manipulator structure, in:
Proceedings of the Ninth World Congress on the Theory of Machines and Mechanisms, 1995, pp. 17291733.
[9] B. Dasgupta, T.S. Mruthyunjaya, A NewtonEuler formulation for the inverse dynamics of the Stewart platform manipulator, Mechanism and Machine Theory 33 (8) (1998) 11351152.
[10] B. Dasgupta, T.S. Mruthyunjaya, Closed-form dynamic equations of the general Stewart platform through the
NewtonEuler approach, Mechanism and Machine Theory 33 (7) (1998) 9931012.
[11] B. Dasgupta, T.S. Mruthyunjaya, Force redundancy in parallel manipulators: theoretical and practical issues,
Mechanism and Machine Theory 33 (6) (1998) 727742.
[12] V.P. Revathi, B. Dasgupta, T.S. Mruthyunjaya, A LagrangeEuler formulation for the dynamics of a planar 3DOF parallel manipulator, in: Proceedings of 7th National Conference on Machines and Mechanisms
(NACOMM) 95, Durgapur, India, 1996, pp. B1B7.
[13] O. Ma, J. Angeles, Direct kinematics and dynamics of a planar three-DOF parallel manipulator, ASME DE v
32-2, Advances in Design Automation 2 (1993) 313320.
[14] P. Choudhury, Dynamics, singularity and controllability analysis of closed-loop manipulators. M.Sc.
Engineering Thesis, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, 1997.
[15] K.-M. Lee, D.K. Shah, Dynamic analysis of a three-degrees-of-freedom in-parallel actuated manipulator, IEEE
Journal of Robotics and Automation 4 (3) (1988) 361367.