Suppression of robot vibrations using input shaping and learning-based structural models
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Industrial robots used in manufacturing processes such as drilling of aerospace structures undergo many rapid positioning motions during each operation. Such aggressive motions excite the structural modes of the robot and cause inertial vibrations at the end-effector, which may damage the part and violate the tolerance requirements. This article presents a vibration avoidance technique based on input shaping combined with a learning-based structural dynamic model. A theoretical dynamic model is first developed for commonly used robotic arms considering the flexibilities of the first three joints of the robot. An artificial neural network is developed and used in conjunction with the dynamic model to predict the natural frequency of the system at any pose in the workspace. Transfer learning techniques are used to extend the trained artificial neural network to account for the mass of the payload with minimal data collection. To reduce the residual vibrations of the robot in rapid motions, zero-vibration derivative shapers are designed and implemented. The effectiveness of the presented methodology has been validated experimentally on a Staubli RX90CR robot with an open-architecture control system developed fully in-house. Experimental results show more than 85% reduction in residual vibrations during aggressive motions of the robot.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it