Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-s22k5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-11T08:03:22.099Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Asymmetric constrained control scheme design with discrete output feedback in unknown robot–environment interaction system

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 September 2022

Xinyi Yu ,
Huizhen Luo Open the ORCID record for Huizhen Luo [Opens in a new window] ,
Shuanwu Shi ,
Yan Wei  and
Linlin Ou
Xinyi Yu
Affiliation:
Zhejiang University of Technology College of Information Engineering, Hangzhou 310023, China
Huizhen Luo
Affiliation:
Zhejiang University of Technology College of Information Engineering, Hangzhou 310023, China
Shuanwu Shi
Affiliation:
Zhejiang University of Technology College of Information Engineering, Hangzhou 310023, China
Yan Wei
Affiliation:
Zhejiang University of Technology College of Information Engineering, Hangzhou 310023, China
Linlin Ou*
Affiliation:
Zhejiang University of Technology College of Information Engineering, Hangzhou 310023, China
*
*Corresponding author: E-mail: linlinou@zjut.edu.cn
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this paper, an overall structure with the asymmetric constrained controller is constructed for human–robot interaction in uncertain environments. The control structure consists of two decoupling loops. In the outer loop, a discrete output feedback adaptive dynamics programing (OPFB ADP) algorithm is proposed to deal with the problems of unknown environment dynamic and unobservable environment position. Besides, a discount factor is added to the discrete OPFB ADP algorithm to improve the convergence speed. In the inner loop, a constrained controller is developed on the basis of asymmetric barrier Lyapunov function, and a neural network method is applied to approximate the dynamic characteristics of the uncertain system model. By utilizing this controller, the robot can track the prescribed trajectory precisely within a security boundary. Simulation and experimental results demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed controller.

Keywords

discrete output feedbackAdaptive dynamic programingNeural networkAsymmetric barrier Lyapunov functionHuman–robot interaction
Type
Research Article
Information
Robotica , Volume 41 , Issue 1 , January 2023 , pp. 105 - 125
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Rovedal, L., Pallucca, G., Pedrocchi, N., Brafhin, F. and Tosatti, L. M., “Iterative learning procedure with reinforcement for high-accuracy force tracking in robotized tasks,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform. 14(4), 1753–1763 (2018).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, M., Mcdaid, A., Veale, J. A., Peng, Y. and Xie, S. Q., “Adaptive trajectory tracking control of a parallel ankle rehabilitation robot with joint-space force distribution,” IEEE Access 7, 85812–85820 (2019).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murata, K., Yamazoe, H., Chung, M. G. and Lee, J. H., “Elderly Care Training Robot for Quantitative Evaluation of Care Operation Development of Robotic Elbow Joint to Imitate Elderly People’s Elbow,” In: IEEE/SICE International Symposium on System Integration (2017).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sharifi, M., Behzadipour, S. and Vossoighi, G., “Nonlinear model reference adaptive impedance control for human-robot interactions,” Control Eng. Pract. 32, 9–27 (2014).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dohring, M. and Newman, W., “The Passivity of Natural Admittance Control Implementations,” In: 20th IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (2003) pp. 3710–3715.Google Scholar
Hogan, N., “Impedance control: An approach to manipulation: Part II-Implementation,” J. Dyn. Syst. Meas. Control 107(1), 8–16 (1985).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colbaugh and N. Hogan, J. E., “Robust control of dynamically interacting systems,” Int. J. Control 48(1), 65–88 (1988).Google Scholar
Newman, W. S., “Stability and performance limits of interaction controllers,” J. Dyn. Syst. Meas. Control 114(4), 563–570 (1992).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buerger, S. P. and Hogan, N., “Complementary stability and loop shaping for improved human-robot interaction,” IEEE Trans. Robot 23(2), 232–244 (2007).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vrabie, D. and Lewis, F. L., “Neural network approach to continuous-time direct adaptive optimal control for partially unknown nonlinear systems,” Neural Netw. 22(3), 237–246 (2009).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jiang, Y. and Jiang, Z. P., “Computational adaptive optimal control for continuous-time linear systems with completely unknown dynamics,” Automatica 48(10), 2699–2704 (2012).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roveda, L., Maskani, J., Franceschi, P., Arash, A. and Pedrocchi, N., “Model-based reinforcement learning variable impedance control for human-robot collaboration,” J. Intell. Robot. Syst. 100, 417–433 (2020).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rizvi, S. A. A. and Lin, Z. L., “Reinforcement learning-based linear quadratic regulation of continuous-time systems using dynamic output feedback,” IEEE Trans. Cybern. 50(11), 4670–4679 (2020).Google Scholar
Gao, W., Jiang, Y., Jiang, Z. P. and Chai, T., “Output-feedback adaptive optimal control of interconnected systems based on robust adaptive dynamic programming,” Automatica 72(3), 37–45 (2016).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, X., Ge, S. S., Zhao, F. and Mei, X. S., “Optimized impedance adaptation of robot manipulator interacting with unknown environment,” IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol. 29(1), 411–419 (2021).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Al-Tamimi, A., Lewis, F. L. and Abu-Khalaf, M., “Model-free Q-learning designs for linear discrete-time zero-sum games with application to H-infinity control,” Automatica 43(3), 473–481 (2007).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roveda, L., Haghshenas, S., Caimmi, M., Pedrocchi, N. and Tosatti, L. M., “Assisting operators in heavy industrial tasks: on the design of an optimized cooperative impedance fuzzy-controller with embedded safety rules,” Front. Robotics AI 6(75), 1–31 (2019).Google ScholarPubMed
Ahmed, M. R. and Kalaykov, I., “Static and Dynamic Collision Safety for Human Robot Interaction Using Magnetorheological Fluid Based Compliant Robot Manipulator,” In: IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics (2010) pp. 370–375.Google Scholar
Fonseca, M. D. A., Adorno, B. V. and Fraisse, P., “Task-space admittance controller with adaptive inertia matrix conditioning,” J. Intell. Robot. Syst. 101(2), 1 (2021).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vicentini, F., Pedrocchi, N., Beschi, M., Giussani, M. and Fogliazza, G., “PIROS: Cooperative, Safe and Reconfigurable Robotic Companion for CNC Pallets load/unload Stations,” In: Bringing Innovative Robotic Technologies From Research Labs to Industrial End-users (Springer, Cham, 2020) pp. 57–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ngo, K. B., Mahony, R. and Jiang, Z. P., “Integrator Backstepping Using Barrier Functions for Systems with Multiple State Constraints,” In: IEEE Conference on Decision Control/European Control Conference (CCD-ECC) (2005) pp. 8306–8312.Google Scholar
Ames, A. D., Coogan, S., Egerstedt, M., Notomista, G., Sreenath, K. and Tabuada, P., “Control Barrier Functions: Theory and Applications,” In: European Control Conference (2019) pp. 3420–3431.Google Scholar
Zhang, S., Xiao, S. T. and Ge, W. L., “Approximation-based Control of an Uncertain Robot with Output Constraints,” In: International Conference on Intelligent Control and Automation Science , vol. 46 (2013) pp. 51–56.Google Scholar
He, W., Chen, Y. H. and Yin, Z., “Adaptive neural network control of an uncertain robot with full-state constraints,” IEEE Trans. Cybern. 46(3), 620–629 (2016).Google ScholarPubMed
Yu, H., Xie, T. T., Paszczynski, S. and Wilamowski, B. M., “Advantages of radial basis function networks for dynamic system design,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 58(12), 5438–5450 (2011).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
He, W. and Dong, Y. T., “Adaptive fuzzy neural network control for a constrained robot using impedance learning,” IEEE Trans. Neur. Netw. Learn. 29(4), 1174–1186 (2018).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yao, Q. J., “Neural adaptive learning synchronization of second-order uncertain chaotic systems with prescribed performance guarantees,” Chaos Solitons & Fractals. 152 (2021).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, Y. J., Lu, S. M., C. Tong, S., Chen, X. K., Chen, C. L. P. and Li, D. J., “Adaptive control-based barrier Lyapunov functions for a class of stochastic nonlinear systems with full state constraints,” Automatica 83, 83–93 (2018).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, Z. J., Liu, J. Q., Huang, Z. C., Peng, Y., Pu, H. Y. and Ding, L., “Adaptive impedance control of human-robot cooperation using reinforcement learning,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 64(10), 8013–8022 (2017).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Modares, H., Ranatunga, I., Lewis, F. L. and Popa, D. O., “Optimized assistive human-robot interaction using reinforcement learning,” IEEE Trans. Cybern. 46(3), 655–667 (2016).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lewis, F. L. and Vamvoudakis, K. G., “Reinforcement learning for partially observable dynamic processes: adaptive dynamic programming using measured output data,” IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. B Cybern. 41(1), 14–25 (2011).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zhang, S., Dong, Y. T., Ouyang, Y. C., Yin, Z. and Peng, K. X., “Adaptive neural control for robotic manipulator with output constraints and uncertainties,” IEEE Trans. Netw. Learn. Syst. 29(11), 5554–5564 (2018).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zheng, H. H. and Fang, Z. D., “Research on tracking error of robot arm based on adaptive neural network control,” Mach. Des. Manufact. 6, 139–141 (2019).Google Scholar
Wu, Y. X., Huang, R., Wang, Y. and Wang, J. Q., “Adaptive tracking control of robot manipulators with input saturation and time-varying output constraints,” Asian J. Control 23(3), 1476–1489 (2021).CrossRefGoogle Scholar