4.6 Article

Collision Avoidance for Redundant Robots in Position-Based Visual Servoing

期刊

IEEE SYSTEMS JOURNAL
卷 13, 期 3, 页码 3479-3489

出版社

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/JSYST.2018.2865503

关键词

Collision avoidance; feature extraction; redundancy; robot motion; visual servoing

资金

  1. Shaanxi Province Key Research and Development Program of China [2018GY-187]
  2. National Key Research and Development Program of China [2017YFB1001900]
  3. Aeronautical Science Foundation of China [2016ZC53022]
  4. Graduate Starting Seed Fund of Northwestern Polytechnic University [ZZ2018026]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

To tackle the problem on trajectory planning or the design of control law, this paper introduces a visual servoing system for a manipulator with redundant joints that the trajectory of the manipulator approaching the target is determined spontaneously by the visual control law. The proposed method resolves joint solution for visual servoing and obstacle avoidance. The work comprises of two procedures, feature extraction for position-based visual servoing (PBVS) and collision avoidance within the working envelope. In the PBVS control, the target pose must he reconstructed with respect to the robot and this results in a Cartesian motion-planning problem. Once the geometric relationship between the target and the end effector is determined, a secure inverse kinematics method incorporating trajectory planning is used to solve the solution of the redundant manipulator by the virtual repulsive torque method. Therefore, the links of the manipulator can always maintain a safe distance from obstacles while approaching the target smoothly. The proposed method is verified with its applicability in experiments using an eye-in-hand manipulator with seven joints. For reusability and extensibility, the system has been coded and constructed in the framework of the Robot Operating System so as that the developed algorithms can be disseminated to different platforms.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据