The Impact of Simplifications of the Dynamic Model on the Motion of a Six-Jointed Industrial Articulated Robotic Arm Movement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research investigates the impact of model simplification on the dynamic performance of an ABB IRB-140 six-jointed industrial robotic arm, concentrating on torque prediction and energy consumption. The entire mathematical model of forward, reverse, differential kinematics, and dynamic model proposed based on the technical specifications of the arm, and to obtain the center of the mass and inertia matrices, which are essential components of the dynamic model, Utilizing Solidworks, we developed three CAD/CAM models representing the manipulator with varying detail levels, such as simplified, semi-detailed, and detailed. Our findings indicate minor differences in the model's torque and energy consumption graphs. The semi-detailed model consumed the most energy, except for joint 1, with the detailed model showing a 0.53% reduction and the simplified model a 6.8% reduction in energy consumption. Despite these variations, all models proved effective in predicting the robot's performance during a standard 30-second task, demonstrating their adequacy for various industrial applications. This research highlights the balance between computational efficiency and accuracy in model selection. While the detailed model offers the highest precision, it demands more computational resources, which is suitable for high-precision tasks. In discrepancy, simplified, less precise models offer computational efficiency, making them adequate for specific scenarios. Our study provides critical insights into selecting dynamic models in industrial robotics. It guides the optimization of performance and energy efficiency based on the required task precision and available computational resources. This comprehensive comparison of dynamic models underscores their applicability and effectiveness in diverse industrial settings.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".