Maneuvering and Vibrations Control of a Free-Floating Space Robot with Flexible Arms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A free-floating space robot with four linkages, two flexible arms and a rigid end-effector that are mounted on a rigid spacecraft; is studied in this paper. The governing equations are derived using Kane’s method. The powerful tools of Kane’s approach in incorporating motion constraints have been applied in the dynamic model. By including the motion constraints in the kinematic and dynamic equations, a two way coupling between the spacecraft motion and manipulator motion is achieved. The assumed mode method is employed to express elastic displacements, except that the associated admissible functions are supplanted by quasicomparison functions. By a perturbation approach, the resulting nonlinear problem is separated into two sets of equations: one for rigid-body maneuvering of the robot and the other for elastic vibrations suppression and rigid-body perturbation control. The kinematic redundancy of the manipulator system is removed by exploiting the conservation of angular momentum law that makes the rigid manipulator system nonholonimic. Nonholonomic constraints, resulted from the nonintegrability of angular momentum, in association with equations obtained from conservation of linear momentum and direct differential kinematics generate a set of ordinary differential equations that govern the motion tracking of the robot. The digitalized linear quadratic regulator (LQR) with prescribed degree of stability is used as the feedback control scheme to suppress vibrations. A numerical example is presented to show the numerical preferences of using Kane’s method in deriving the equations of motion and also the efficacy of the control scheme. Acquiring a zero magnitude for spacecraft attitude control moment approves the free-floating behavior of the space robot in which considerable amount of energy is saved.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".