Design and Control of a Fully Actuated Aerial Manipulator System for Measuring the Thickness of Metal Facilities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An aerial manipulator (AM) system for thickness measurement of metal facilities is introduced in this article, which includes a fully actuated flying platform and an end effector. The AM utilizes the fully actuated advantage of the flying platform to apply controlled contact forces to the environment without the need for complex robotic manipulators. An end effector is designed, which includes an ultrasonic thickness (UT) probe mounted on a spring-damping buffer, and a coupling agent injection device allows the coupling to be applied during the inspection process. We divide the aerial inspection process into two phases: the approach phase and the contact phase. In the approach phase, we design a yaw control assistance method to ensure that the AM can contact the target surface with the desired yaw, even outside the operator’s line of sight. In the contact phase, a parallel force/velocity controller tailored to the motion characteristic of the AM is proposed to achieve precise contact force control. A switching function is designed to ensure stable transitions between the motion control and force control. The control effectiveness and the ability to measure the thickness of the metal facility of the AM system are demonstrated by practical experiments.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".