A comparison between robust and adaptive hybrid position/force control schemes for hydraulic underwater manipulators

Tele-operated hydrauilic underwater manipulators are commonly used to perform remote underwater intervention tasks such as weld inspection or mating of connectors Automation of these tasks to use tele-assitance requires a suitable hybrid position/force control scheme, to specify simultaneously the r...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Transactions of the Institute of Measurement and Control 1997-01, Vol.19 (2), p.107-116
Main Authors: Lane, D.M., Dunnigan, M.W., Clegg, A.C., Dauchez, P., Cellier, L.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Contact
Controllers
Dynamics
Fluid flow
Hydraulics
Manipulators
Robot arms
Robots
Underwater
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Tele-operated hydrauilic underwater manipulators are commonly used to perform remote underwater intervention tasks such as weld inspection or mating of connectors Automation of these tasks to use tele-assitance requires a suitable hybrid position/force control scheme, to specify simultaneously the robot motion and contact forces. Classical linear control does not allow for the highly non-linear and time varying robot dynamics in this situation. Adequate control performance requires more advanced controllers. This paper presents and compares two different advanced hybrid control algorithms. The first is based on a modified Variable Structure Control (VSC-HF) with a virtual environment, and the second uses a multivariable self-tuning adaptive controller. A direct comparison of the two proposed control schemes is performed in simulation, using a model of the dynamics of a hydraulic underwater manipulator (a Slingsby TA9) in contact with a surface. These comparisons look at the performance of the controllers under a wide variety of operating conditions, including different environment stiffnesses, positions of the robot and dynamic parameters. Conclusions are drawn based on the relative performance of each controller and on the practicalities of the proposed schemes.
ISSN:0142-3312
1477-0369
DOI:10.1177/014233129701900205