MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Backlash-Compensated Active Disturbance Rejection Control of Nonlinear Multi-Input Series Elastic Actuators

2020· article· en· W3089397918 on OpenAlexaff
Brayden DeBoon, Scott Nokleby, Carlos Rossa

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicProsthetics and Rehabilitation Robotics
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBacklashControl theory (sociology)ActuatorDeflection (physics)TorqueActive disturbance rejection controlNonlinear systemClutchEngineeringComputer scienceControl engineeringState observerPhysicsAutomotive engineeringArtificial intelligenceMechanical engineeringControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Series elastic actuators with passive compliance have been gaining increasing popularity in force-controlled robotic manipulators. One of the reasons is the actuator's ability to infer the applied torque by measuring the deflection of the elastic element as opposed to directly with dedicated torque sensors. Proper deflection control is pinnacle to achieve a desired output torque and, therefore, small deviances in positional measurements or a nonlinear deformation can have adverse effects on performance. In applications with larger torque requirements, the actuators typically use gear reductions which inherently result in mechanical backlash. This combined with the nonlinear behaviour of the elastic element and unmodelled dynamics, can severely compromise force fidelity.This paper proposes a backlash compensating active disturbance rejection controller (ADRC) for multi-input series elastic actuators. In addition to proper deflection control, a multiinput active disturbance rejection controller is derived and implemented experimentally to mitigate any unmodelled nonlinearities or perturbations to the plant model. The controller is experimentally validated on a hybrid motor-brake-clutch series elastic actuator and the controller performance is compared against traditional error-based controllers. It is shown that the backlash compensated ADRC outperforms classical PID and ADRC methods and is a viable solution to positional measurement error in elastic actuators.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicProsthetics and Rehabilitation RoboticsFrench-language works237,207