4.6 Article

Indirect Force Control of a Cable-Suspended Aerial Multi-Robot Manipulator

期刊

IEEE ROBOTICS AND AUTOMATION LETTERS
卷 7, 期 3, 页码 6726-6733

出版社

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/LRA.2022.3176457

关键词

Aerial systems; Mechanics and control; multi-robot systems; compliance and impedance control

类别

资金

  1. ANR [ANR-17-CE33-0007 MuRoPhen]
  2. European Union's Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme [871479 AERIAL-CORE]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We present a control strategy for a Cable-suspended Aerial Multi-Robot Manipulator (CS-AMRM) called the Fly-Crane, which allows accurate and safe tasks in the presence of expected or unexpected interactions between the platform and the environment. The control strategy enhances a previously developed Inverse Kinematic Controller (IKC) with an admittance framework and estimates contacts through a generalized momentum-based observer. Extensive experimental tests were conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of the approach and provide practical insights.
We present the control in physical interaction with the environment of a Cable-suspended Aerial Multi-Robot Manipulator (CS-AMRM) called the Fly-Crane, composed of three aerial vehicles towed to a platform by means of six cables. The control strategy enables the system to accurately and safely perform tasks involving expected or unexpected interactions between the platform and the environment, in the absence of dedicated force/torque sensors. A previously developed Inverse Kinematic Controller (IKC) is enhanced with an admittance framework, and contacts are estimated through a generalized momentum-based observer. To assess the validity of our approach, and to provide practical insights into the method, we perform extensive experimental tests, comprehending the admittance property shaping to modulate stiffness, damping, and virtual mass, as well as experiments in a more realistic scenario involving contacts between the Fly-Crane and the environment.

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