MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2069597727 · doi:10.1115/1.4001898

Robust Impedance Control of Manipulators Carrying a Heavy Payload

2010· article· en· W2069597727 on OpenAlexaff
Farhad Aghili

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dynamic Systems Measurement and Control · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobot Manipulation and Learning
Canadian institutionsCanadian Space Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsControl theory (sociology)Impedance controlPayload (computing)Controller (irrigation)InertiaElectrical impedanceAccelerationAccelerometerMoment of inertiaInertial frame of referenceEngineeringComputer sciencePhysicsControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A heavy payload attached to the wrist force/moment (F/M) sensor of a manipulator can cause the conventional impedance controller to fail in establishing the desired impedance due to the noncontact components of the force measurement, i.e., the inertial and gravitational forces of the payload. This paper proposes an impedance control scheme for such a manipulator to accurately shape its force-response without needing any acceleration measurement. Therefore, no wrist accelerometer or a dynamic estimator for compensating the inertial load forces is required. The impedance controller is further developed using an inner/outer loop feedback approach that not only overcomes the robot dynamics uncertainty, but also allows the specification of the target impedance model in a general form, e.g., a nonlinear model. The stability and convergence of the impedance controller are analytically investigated, and the results show that the control input remains bounded provided that the desired inertia is selected to be different from the payload inertia. Experimental results demonstrate that the proposed impedance controller is able to accurately shape the impedance of a manipulator carrying a relatively heavy load according to the desired impedance model.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.180 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations23
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dynamic Systems Measurement and ControlSame topicRobot Manipulation and LearningFrench-language works237,207