Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Figure 2 – uploaded by Rogério Vitalli

See full PDFdownloadDownload figure
Fig 2: Systematic Method Denavit-Hartenberg ( PUMA 560) manipulator of six revolute joints is shown in figure 2. D-H notation, an outline of the PUMA 560 robotic

Figure 2 Systematic Method Denavit-Hartenberg ( PUMA 560) manipulator of six revolute joints is shown in figure 2. D-H notation, an outline of the PUMA 560 robotic

Related Figures (11)

Fig 1: Denavit-Hartenberg (DH) notation constant and determined by the link geometry. Only one of
Fig 1: Denavit-Hartenberg (DH) notation constant and determined by the link geometry. Only one of
Typical disturbances to consider are external torques and forces. Another possibility is to consider the variation in mass in the terminal organ, simulating the grasping of a body. The motion path generator tells the controller which path is desired for the manipulator. There are several ways to define these trajectories, such as: cubic spline, 4-3-4, and others. In order to consider typical disturbances, a contact force / torque generator was implemented. With respect to force / torque control, the experimental results found by (Paul, 1981) for different force control laws with varying reference inputs, point out that the law of proportional- integral control (PI) provides a better performance. The main advantage is the first order admittance, where it is not necessary to require the rate of change of force error. Shown in Table 1. Parameters of the PUMA 560. [3], [7], [10]. in Table 1. Parameters of the PUMA 560. [3], [7], [10].
Typical disturbances to consider are external torques and forces. Another possibility is to consider the variation in mass in the terminal organ, simulating the grasping of a body. The motion path generator tells the controller which path is desired for the manipulator. There are several ways to define these trajectories, such as: cubic spline, 4-3-4, and others. In order to consider typical disturbances, a contact force / torque generator was implemented. With respect to force / torque control, the experimental results found by (Paul, 1981) for different force control laws with varying reference inputs, point out that the law of proportional- integral control (PI) provides a better performance. The main advantage is the first order admittance, where it is not necessary to require the rate of change of force error. Shown in Table 1. Parameters of the PUMA 560. [3], [7], [10]. in Table 1. Parameters of the PUMA 560. [3], [7], [10].
triple is formed by [1 1 1], path points are mapped, which are fundamental for interpolation of trajectories. Finally, the global scale factor or digital zoom is the element responsible for viewing the results; the only value that should not be assigned to it is zero, as the points or lines would tend to infinity (det = 0). If this value is positive, the “object” that we want to visualize is below the observer; if the assumed value is negative, the “object” would be beyond the observer. In other words, the scale factor amplifies or reduces the size of the "object;" in general its value is always | which characterizes the real size of the object. [5], [8]. observer. In other words, the scale factor amplifies or we want to visualize is below the observer; if the assumed
triple is formed by [1 1 1], path points are mapped, which are fundamental for interpolation of trajectories. Finally, the global scale factor or digital zoom is the element responsible for viewing the results; the only value that should not be assigned to it is zero, as the points or lines would tend to infinity (det = 0). If this value is positive, the “object” that we want to visualize is below the observer; if the assumed value is negative, the “object” would be beyond the observer. In other words, the scale factor amplifies or reduces the size of the "object;" in general its value is always | which characterizes the real size of the object. [5], [8]. observer. In other words, the scale factor amplifies or we want to visualize is below the observer; if the assumed
Fig 4: Joint-01 simulation under the action of the four controllers with the presence of coulomb friction, with no Fig 7: Joint-04 simulation under the action of the four controllers with the presence of coulomb friction, with no Fig 6: Joint-03 simulation under the action of the four controllers with the presence of coulomb friction, with no change in mass in the last link, with the actual gear ratio of the PUMA 560 (continuous dashed) and with a single or directly connected gear ratio (dashed line) controllers with the presence of coulomb friction, with no Fig 6: Joint-03 simulation under the action of the four The results presented show the performance of the PID, TC,
Fig 4: Joint-01 simulation under the action of the four controllers with the presence of coulomb friction, with no Fig 7: Joint-04 simulation under the action of the four controllers with the presence of coulomb friction, with no Fig 6: Joint-03 simulation under the action of the four controllers with the presence of coulomb friction, with no change in mass in the last link, with the actual gear ratio of the PUMA 560 (continuous dashed) and with a single or directly connected gear ratio (dashed line) controllers with the presence of coulomb friction, with no Fig 6: Joint-03 simulation under the action of the four The results presented show the performance of the PID, TC,
change in mass in the last link, with the actual gear ratio of the PUMA 560 (continuous dashed) and with a single or directly connected gear ratio (dashed line) Fig 5: Joint-02 simulation under the action of the four
change in mass in the last link, with the actual gear ratio of the PUMA 560 (continuous dashed) and with a single or directly connected gear ratio (dashed line) Fig 5: Joint-02 simulation under the action of the four
Fig 9: Joint-06 simulation under the action of the four Fig 8: Joint-05 simulation under the action of the four controllers with the presence of coulomb friction, with no change in mass in the last link, with the actual gear ratio of the PUMA 560 (continuous dashed) and with a single or directly connected gear ratio (dashed line) controllers with the presence of coulomb friction, with no controllers with the presence of coulomb friction, with no
Fig 9: Joint-06 simulation under the action of the four Fig 8: Joint-05 simulation under the action of the four controllers with the presence of coulomb friction, with no change in mass in the last link, with the actual gear ratio of the PUMA 560 (continuous dashed) and with a single or directly connected gear ratio (dashed line) controllers with the presence of coulomb friction, with no controllers with the presence of coulomb friction, with no
Fig 8: Joint-05 simulation under the action of the four change in mass in the last link, with the actual gear ratio of the PUMA 560 (continuous dashed) and with a single or directly connected gear ratio (dashed line)
Fig 8: Joint-05 simulation under the action of the four change in mass in the last link, with the actual gear ratio of the PUMA 560 (continuous dashed) and with a single or directly connected gear ratio (dashed line)
Related topics:
Computer ScienceRobustness (evolution)Mathematics and Computer Sciences
580 California St., Suite 400
San Francisco, CA, 94104
© 2025 Academia. All rights reserved