Google Patentsopen access

Master-slave system — Muscle Corporation (US9855653B2)

ABSTRACT

Abstract

A master-slave system ( 1 ) according to the present invention includes at least one master displacement sensor (Pm 1 to Pm 3 ) for measuring a master displacement for a master robot, at least one slave displacement sensor (Ps 1 to Ps 3 ) for measuring a slave displacement for a slave robot, a master target displacement calculating device ( 2 ) for mapping the slave displacement and thereby obtaining a master target displacement which is a target value for the master displacement corresponding to the slave displacement, and a master actuator (Am 1 to Am 3 ) for generating a master driving force to position-control the master robot on the basis of the master target displacement and the master displacement. The mapping is predefined such that a set of master target displacements excludes a singular configuration for the master robot. The master-slave system ( 1 ) renders it possible to solve a singular configuration problem for both the master robot and the slave robot.

Description

TECHNICAL FIELD

The present invention relates to a master-slave system to which force-projecting bilateral control is applied.

BACKGROUND ART

The so-called master-slave system originated from a mechanical master-slave system in which a master robot and a slave robot are mechanically linked so as to work in coordination with each other. The mechanical master-slave system is advantageous in that the operator can have a direct feel of operation, but also disadvantageous in that: the degree of freedom in mechanism design is limited because of geometric restrictions between the operator and the master robot and also between the operator and the slave robot; the system naturally feels heavy to manipulate because the system is driven by human power; and further, the system has trouble in ensuring safety when abnormalities arise.

Therefore, although the mechanical master-slave system is still considered useful, the current mainstream is an electrical master-slave system in which the master robot and the slave robot are electrically interconnected but mechanically separated, and are operable independently of each other. In general, the electrical system can be flexibly controlled with electrical means or by means of software, and can have a mechanism that can be designed with flexibility, and further, the safety of the system can be ensured readily by constructing the system such that the operator is not involved in the working space of a high power actuator.

The electrical master-slave system having these characteristics has been developed mainly for such an application as remote control (i.e., teleoperation), and therefore, the study thereof was carried out mainly focusing on improvements in position and force repeatability, transparency, or communication time delay. An overview description will be provided below regarding basic types of bilateral control for the electrical master-slave system.

First, for convenience of explanation, the equations of motion that represents the dynamics of the master robot and the slave robot are defined by way of example as follows:

[Expression 1]

J m T f m +τ m =M m {umlaut over (q)} m +r m   (1);

[Expression 2]

τ s =M s {umlaut over (q)} s +r s +J s T f s   (2),

where f m (t) is a master operating force applied to the master robot by the operator at time t, and f s (t) is a slave working force applied to the environment (i.e., a work object) by the slave robot at the same time t. Furthermore, respectively for the master robot and the slave robot, q m (t) and q s (t) are joint displacements, τ m (t) and τ s (t) are joint driving forces, M m (q m ) and M s (q s ) are inertia matrices, and r m (q• m , q m ) and r s (q• s , q s ) remainder terms aggregating effects other than inertia. J m (q m ) and J s (q s ) are Jacobian matrices representing differential kinematics and satisfying the following relationship:

[Expression 3]

{dot over (x)} m =J m {dot over (q)} m   (3);

[Expression 4]

{dot over (x)} s =J s {dot over (q)} s   (4),

where x m (t) and x s (t) are displacements of an operating end of the master robot and a working end of the slave robot in a work coordinate system respectively corresponding to q m (t) and q s (t). Note that symbols, such as “(t)”, which indicate independent variables of a function might be omitted herein.

[Position-Symmetric Bilateral Control]

Position-symmetric bilateral control is bilateral displacement error servo control between the master and the slave. This control eliminates the need for a force sensor, and therefore, renders it possible to readily configure a relatively stable system. In the case where proportional control in the work coordinate system is used, control laws for the master robot and the slave robot are, for example, as shown below:

[Expression 5]

τ m =J m T S f −1 K p ( x a −S p −1 x m )  (5);

[Expression 6]

τ s =J s T K p ( S p −1 x m −x s )  (6),

where K p is a position control gain. Moreover, S f is the scale ratio of force from the master robot to the slave robot, and S p is the scale ratio of displacement from the slave robot to the master robot.

From the master dynamics (1), the slave dynamics (2), the master control law (5), and the slave control law (6), the following expression is obtained.

[Expression 7]

f m =J m −T ( M m {umlaut over (q)} m +r m )+ S f −T J s −T ( M s {umlaut over (q)} s +r s )+ S f −1 f s   (7)

In this manner, in the position-symmetric bilateral control, the influence of the master dynamics is added to the master operating force f m as is, and the influence of the slave dynamics and the slave working force f s are also added by a factor of S f −1 .

[Force-Reflecting Bilateral Control]

In force-reflecting bilateral control, a working force sensor for measuring the slave working force f s is disposed at the working end of the slave robot in order to “reflect” the slave working force f s in the force of driving the master. In this case, the master control law is as shown below. Note that the slave control law is the same as Expression (6) for the position-symmetric bilateral control.

[Expression 8]

τ m =−J m T S f −1 f s   (8)

From the master dynamics (1) and the master control law (8), the following expression is obtained.

[Expression 9]

f m =J m −T ( M m {umlaut over (q)} m +r m )+ S f −1 f s   (9)

In the case of the force-reflecting bilateral control, as in the case of the position-symmetric bilateral control, the influence of the master dynamics is added to the master operating force f m as is, and the slave working force f s is also added by a factor of S f −1 . On the other hand, the master operating force f m is not influenced by the slave dynamics.

[Force-Reflecting Servo Bilateral Control]

In force-reflecting servo bilateral control, an operating force sensor for measuring the master operating force f m is disposed at the operating end of the master robot, a working force sensor for measuring the slave working force f s is disposed at the working end of the slave robot, and a force error servomechanism is configured on the master side. In this case, the master control law is as shown below.

[Expression 10]

τ m =J m T K f ( f m −S f −1 f s )− J m T S f −1 f s   (10)

The above expression includes force error servo control in addition to the master control law (8) for the force-reflecting type. Note that K f is a force control gain. Moreover, the slave control law is the same as in Expression (6) for the position-symmetric bilateral control.

From the master dynamics (1) and the master control law (10), the following expression is obtained. Note that I is an identity matrix.

[Expression 11]

f m =( I+K j ) −1 J m −T ( M m {umlaut over (q)} m +r m )+ S f −1 f s   (11)

By increasing the force control gain K f in the above expression to a sufficient degree, the following expression can be obtained.

[Expression 12]

f m ≃S f −1 f s   (12)

In this manner, in the case of the force-reflecting servo bilateral control, by sufficiently increasing the force control gain K f , the influence of the master dynamics on the master operating force f m can be reduced to a negligible degree, so that only the slave working force f s is added to the master operating force f m by a factor of S f −1 . However, for implementation reasons, the stability of bilateral control decreases as the force control gain K f increases, and therefore, it is difficult to eliminate the influence of the master dynamics on the master operating force f m , so that complete transparency cannot be achieved.

[Parallel Bilateral Control]

In Non-Patent Document 1, Miyazaki et al. propose parallel bilateral control, which is an improvement to the traditional serial connection method for bilateral control. In the case of the parallel type, an operating force sensor for measuring the master operating force f m is disposed at the operating end of the master robot, a working force sensor for measuring the slave working force f s (t) is disposed at the working end of the slave robot, and a parallel displacement error servo mechanism is configured by the master and the slave. In this case, the control laws are as shown below:

[Expression 13]

τ m =J m T K p ( x d −S p −1 x m )  (13);

[Expression 14]

τ s =J s T S j K p ( x d −x s )  (14);

[Expression 15]

x d =K f ( f m −S f −1 f s )  (15),

Note that x d (t) is a target displacement for each of the operating end of the master robot and the working end of the slave robot at time t in the work coordinate system.

From the master dynamics (1), the slave dynamics (2), the master control law (13), the slave control law (14), and the target displacement calculation (15), the following expression can be obtained.

[Expression 16]

f m =( I+ 2 K p K f ) −1 J m −T ( M m {dot over (q)} m +r m )+( I+ 2 K p K f ) −1 S f −1 J s −T ( M s {umlaut over (q)} s +r s )+( I+ 2 K p K f ) −1 *K p ( S p −1 x m +x s )+ S f −1 f s   (16)

Furthermore, by increasing the force control gain K f in the above expression to a sufficient degree, the following expression can be obtained.

[Expression 17]

f m ≃S f −1 f s   (17)

The advantage of the parallel bilateral control is that phase lag is reduced by providing the master control law and the slave control law in parallel, resulting in bilateral control with increased stability. However, in the case of the parallel bilateral control, the master operating force f m is influenced by both the master dynamics and the slave dynamics, as can be seen from the first and second terms of the right-hand side of Expression (16). Moreover, in the case of the parallel bilateral control, even a spring constant term, which is not included in the original dynamics, is added to the master operating force f m , as can be seen from the third term of the right-hand side of Expression (16). Such influences can be reduced to a negligible degree by increasing the force control gain K f , but for implementation reasons, even the increased stability of the bilateral control can be weakened as the force control gain K f increases, and therefore, even the parallel bilateral control cannot achieve complete transparency.

[Force-Projecting Bilateral Control]

The basic types of bilateral control, including the position-symmetric type, the force-reflecting type, the force-reflecting servo type, and the parallel type, have been described so far, and conventional bilateral control, including these types, has Problems 1 through 6 as follows:

[Problem 1]A problem common among the force-reflecting type, the force-reflecting servo type, and the parallel type.

Information about the slave working force f s is required for control, and therefore, application to a system in which the working force sensor cannot be mounted on the slave robot is not possible.

[Problem 2]A problem common between the position-symmetric type and the force-reflecting type.

Control drives the system in accordance with displacement error of the master robot, and therefore, it is necessary to set the inertia and the friction of the master robot as little as possible, such that displacement error of the master robot can be readily generated by human power, i.e., high backdrivability is ensured, resulting in difficulty in achieving a highly accurate mechanism.

[Problem 3]A problem common between the force-reflecting servo type and the parallel type.

Control is intended to achieve transparency, and therefore, the operator mainly senses only the dynamics of the environment (i.e., a work object).

[Problem 4]A problem common among the position-symmetric type, the force-reflecting type, the force-reflecting servo type, and the parallel type.

The slave robot is always connected to the master robot, and therefore, there is a risk that unstable behavior might be excited in the system solely by an external force applied to the slave robot, even without the operator manipulating the master robot.

[Problem 5]A problem common among the position-symmetric type, the force-reflecting type, the force-reflecting servo type, and the parallel type.

A command value for the slave robot is position-related, and the slave dynamics need to be cancelled by positional control, which imposes a large burden on the control system. In addition, the control law based on the positional control does not necessarily allow another control law to be superimposed thereon.

[Problem 6]A problem common among the position-symmetric type, the force-reflecting type, the force-reflecting servo type, and the parallel type.

When positional control in the work coordinate system is applied to the slave robot, a singular configuration prob

TECHNICAL FIELD

The present invention relates to a master-slave system to which force-projecting bilateral control is applied.

BACKGROUND ART

The so-called master-slave system originated from a mechanical master-slave system in which a master robot and a slave robot are mechanically linked so as to work in coordination with each other. The mechanical master-slave system is advantageous in that the operator can have a direct feel of operation, but also disadvantageous in that: the degree of freedom in mechanism design is limited because of geometric restrictions between the operator and the master robot and also between the operator and the slave robot; the system naturally feels heavy to manipulate because the system is driven by human power; and further, the system has trouble in ensuring safety when abnormalities arise.

Therefore, although the mechanical master-slave system is still considered useful, the current mainstream is an electrical master-slave system in which the master robot and the slave robot are electrically interconnected but mechanically separated, and are operable independently of each other. In general, the electrical system can be flexibly controlled with electrical means or by means of software, and can have a mechanism that can be designed with flexibility, and further, the safety of the system can be ensured readily by constructing the system such that the operator is not involved in the working space of a high power actuator.

The electrical master-slave system having these characteristics has been developed mainly for such an application as remote control (i.e., teleoperation), and therefore, the study thereof was carried out mainly focusing on improvements in position and force repeatability, transparency, or communication time delay. An overview description will be provided below regarding basic types of bilateral control for the electrical master-slave system.

First, for convenience of explanation, the equations of motion that represents the dynamics of the master robot and the slave robot are defined by way of example as follows:

[Expression 1]

J m T f m +τ m =M m {umlaut over (q)} m +r m   (1);

[Expression 2]

τ s =M s {umlaut over (q)} s +r s +J s T f s   (2),

where f m (t) is a master operating force applied to the master robot by the operator at time t, and f s (t) is a slave working force applied to the environment (i.e., a work object) by the slave robot at the same time t. Furthermore, respectively for the master robot and the slave robot, q m (t) and q s (t) are joint displacements, τ m (t) and τ s (t) are joint driving forces, M m (q m ) and M s (q s ) are inertia matrices, and r m (q• m , q m ) and r s (q• s , q s ) remainder terms aggregating effects other than inertia. J m (q m ) and J s (q s ) are Jacobian matrices representing differential kinematics and satisfying the following relationship:

[Expression 3]

{dot over (x)} m =J m {dot over (q)} m   (3);

[Expression 4]

{dot over (x)} s =J s {dot over (q)} s   (4),

where x m (t) and x s (t) are displacements of an operating end of the master robot and a working end of the slave robot in a work coordinate system respectively corresponding to q m (t) and q s (t). Note that symbols, such as “(t)”, which indicate independent variables of a function might be omitted herein.

[Position-Symmetric Bilateral Control]

Position-symmetric bilateral control is bilateral displacement error servo control between the master and the slave. This control eliminates the need for a force sensor, and therefore, renders it possible to readily configure a relatively stable system. In the case where proportional control in the work coordinate system is used, control laws for the master robot and the slave robot are, for example, as shown below:

[Expression 5]

τ m =J m T S f −1 K p ( x a −S p −1 x m )  (5);

[Expression 6]

τ s =J s T K p ( S p −1 x m −x s )  (6),

where K p is a position control gain. Moreover, S f is the scale ratio of force from the master robot to the slave robot, and S p is the scale ratio of displacement from the slave robot to the master robot.

From the master dynamics (1), the slave dynamics (2), the master control law (5), and the slave control law (6), the following expression is obtained.

[Expression 7]

f m =J m −T ( M m {umlaut over (q)} m +r m )+ S f −T J s −T ( M s {umlaut over (q)} s +r s )+ S f −1 f s   (7)

In this manner, in the position-symmetric bilateral control, the influence of the master dynamics is added to the master operating force f m as is, and the influence of the slave dynamics and the slave working force f s are also added by a factor of S f −1 .

[Force-Reflecting Bilateral Control]

In force-reflecting bilateral control, a working force sensor for measuring the slave working force f s is disposed at the working end of the slave robot in order to “reflect” the slave working force f s in the force of driving the master. In this case, the master control law is as shown below. Note that the slave control law is the same as Expression (6) for the position-symmetric bilateral control.

[Expression 8]

τ m =−J m T S f −1 f s   (8)

From the master dynamics (1) and the master control law (8), the following expression is obtained.

[Expression 9]

f m =J m −T ( M m {umlaut over (q)} m +r m )+ S f −1 f s   (9)

In the case of the force-reflecting bilateral control, as in the case of the position-symmetric bilateral control, the influence of the master dynamics is added to the master operating force f m as is, and the slave working force f s is also added by a factor of S f −1 . On the other hand, the master operating force f m is not influenced by the slave dynamics.

[Force-Reflecting Servo Bilateral Control]

In force-reflecting servo bilateral control, an operating force sensor for measuring the master operating force f m is disposed at the operating end of the master robot, a working force sensor for measuring the slave working force f s is disposed at the working end of the slave robot, and a force error servomechanism is configured on the master side. In this case, the master control law is as shown below.

[Expression 10]

τ m =J m T K f ( f m −S f −1 f s )− J m T S f −1 f s   (10)

The above expression includes force error servo control in addition to the master control law (8) for the force-reflecting type. Note that K f is a force control gain. Moreover, the slave control law is the same as in Expression (6) for the position-symmetric bilateral control.

From the master dynamics (1) and the master control law (10), the following expression is obtained. Note that I is an identity matrix.

[Expression 11]

f m =( I+K j ) −1 J m −T ( M m {umlaut over (q)} m +r m )+ S f −1 f s   (11)

By increasing the force control gain K f in the above expression to a sufficient degree, the following expression can be obtained.

[Expression 12]

f m ≃S f −1 f s   (12)

In this manner, in the case of the force-reflecting servo bilateral control, by sufficiently increasing the force control gain K f , the influence of the master dynamics on the master operating force f m can be reduced to a negligible degree, so that only the slave working force f s is added to the master operating force f m by a factor of S f −1 . However, for implementation reasons, the stability of bilateral control decreases as the force control gain K f increases, and therefore, it is difficult to eliminate the influence of the master dynamics on the master operating force f m , so that complete transparency cannot be achieved.

[Parallel Bilateral Control]

In Non-Patent Document 1, Miyazaki et al. propose parallel bilateral control, which is an improvement to the traditional serial connection method for bilateral control. In the case of the parallel type, an operating force sensor for measuring the master operating force f m is disposed at the operating end of the master robot, a working force sensor for measuring the slave working force f s (t) is disposed at the working end of the slave robot, and a parallel displacement error servo mechanism is configured by the master and the slave. In this case, the control laws are as shown below:

[Expression 13]

τ m =J m T K p ( x d −S p −1 x m )  (13);

[Expression 14]

τ s =J s T S j K p ( x d −x s )  (14);

[Expression 15]

x d =K f ( f m −S f −1 f s )  (15),

Note that x d (t) is a target displacement for each of the operating end of the master robot and the working end of the slave robot at time t in the work coordinate system.

From the master dynamics (1), the slave dynamics (2), the master control law (13), the slave control law (14), and the target displacement calculation (15), the following expression can be obtained.

[Expression 16]

f m =( I+ 2 K p K f ) −1 J m −T ( M m {dot over (q)} m +r m )+( I+ 2 K p K f ) −1 S f −1 J s −T ( M s {umlaut over (q)} s +r s )+( I+ 2 K p K f ) −1 *K p ( S p −1 x m +x s )+ S f −1 f s   (16)

Furthermore, by increasing the force control gain K f in the above expression to a sufficient degree, the following expression can be obtained.

[Expression 17]

f m ≃S f −1 f s   (17)

The advantage of the parallel bilateral control is that phase lag is reduced by providing the master control law and the slave control law in parallel, resulting in bilateral control with increased stability. However, in the case of the parallel bilateral control, the master operating force f m is influenced by both the master dynamics and the slave dynamics, as can be seen from the first and second terms of the right-hand side of Expression (16). Moreover, in the case of the parallel bilateral control, even a spring constant term, which is not included in the original dynamics, is added to the master operating force f m , as can be seen from the third term of the right-hand side of Expression (16). Such influences can be reduced to a negligible degree by increasing the force control gain K f , but for implementation reasons, even the increased stability of the bilateral control can be weakened as the force control gain K f increases, and therefore, even the parallel bilateral control cannot achieve complete transparency.

[Force-Projecting Bilateral Control]

The basic types of bilateral control, including the position-symmetric type, the force-reflecting type, the force-reflecting servo type, and the parallel type, have been described so far, and conventional bilateral control, including these types, has Problems 1 through 6 as follows:

[Problem 1]A problem common among the force-reflecting type, the force-reflecting servo type, and the parallel type.

Information about the slave working force f s is required for control, and therefore, application to a system in which the working force sensor cannot be mounted on the slave robot is not possible.

[Problem 2]A problem common between the position-symmetric type and the force-reflecting type.

Control drives the system in accordance with displacement error of the master robot, and therefore, it is necessary to set the inertia and the friction of the master robot as little as possible, such that displacement error of the master robot can be readily generated by human power, i.e., high backdrivability is ensured, resulting in difficulty in achieving a highly accurate mechanism.

[Problem 3]A problem common between the force-reflecting servo type and the parallel type.

Control is intended to achieve transparency, and therefore, the operator mainly senses only the dynamics of the environment (i.e., a work object).

[Problem 4]A problem common among the position-symmetric type, the force-reflecting type, the force-reflecting servo type, and the parallel type.

The slave robot is always connected to the master robot, and therefore, there is a risk that unstable behavior might be excited in the system solely by an external force applied to the slave robot, even without the operator manipulating the master robot.

[Problem 5]A problem common among the position-symmetric type, the force-reflecting type, the force-reflecting servo type, and the parallel type.

A command value for the slave robot is position-related, and the slave dynamics need to be cancelled by positional control, which imposes a large burden on the control system. In addition, the control law based on the positional control does not necessarily allow another control law to be superimposed thereon.

[Problem 6]A problem common among the position-symmetric type, the force-reflecting type, the force-reflecting servo type, and the parallel type.

When positional control in the work coordinate system is applied to the slave robot, a singular configuration problem might arise, so that control failure might occur when the posture of the slave robot approaches a singular configuration.

As new bilateral control capable of neatly solving these problems, the present inventor proposes the basic configuration of “force-projecting bilateral control” in Patent Document 1. In the force-projecting type, an operating force sensor for measuring the master operating force f m is disposed at the operating end of the master robot, and the measured master operating force f m is “projected” to the force of driving the slave robot. In the force-projecting bilateral control, the master control law and the slave control law are, for example, as shown below:

[Expression 18]

τ m =J m T K p ( S p x s −x m )  (18)

[Expression 19]

τ s =J s T S f f m   (19)

From the slave dynamics (2) and the slave control law (19), the following expression can be obtained.

[Expression 20]

f m =S f −1 J s T ( M s {umlaut over (q)} s +r s )+ S f −1 f s   (20)

In this manner, in the case of the force-projecting bilateral control, the influence of the slave dynamics and the slave working force f s are added to the master operating force f m by a factor of S f −1 . That is, the force-projecting bilateral control is an approach to measure the master operating force f m applied to the master robot by the operator, rather than the slave working force f s applied to the environment (i.e., a work object) by the slave robot, and allow the master to pass force information forward to the slave while allowing the slave to feed displacement information back to the master.

The force-projecting bilateral control has Characteristics 1 through 6 as shown below:

[Characteristic 1] Applicable to even a system in which the working force sensor cannot be mounted on the slave robot, because no information about the slave working force f s is needed.

[Characteristic 2] Not requiring the master robot to have backdrivability because the system is driven by the master operating force f m applied to the master robot by the operator, rather than in accordance with displacement error of the master robot, so that the master robot can be rendered to be a mechanism which is robust enough to withstand human power and highly accurate.

[Characteristic 3] Being control that is intended to achieve “projectivity” to be described later, rather than transparency, and therefore, allowing the operator to feel the dynamics of the environment (i.e., a work object) and even the slave dynamics, but no master dynamics.

[Characteristic 4] No risk of unstable behavior being excited in the system solely by an external force applied to the slave robot because the connection from the master robot to the slave robot is shut off (i.e., the connection therebetween changes from bilateral to unilateral) unless the operator applies the master operating force f m to the master robot.

[Characteristic 5] The command value for the slave robot is related to drive power (force and torque), rather than position-related, which facilitates the implementation of the slave control law, and imposes little burden on the control system. The control is based on drive power, and therefore, any type of control based on drive power can be superimposed on the slave control law.

[Characteristic 6] The slave robot is not position-controlled but is controlled in terms of drive power, and therefore, no singular configuration problem occurs even if the control in the work coordinate system is applied, so that control failure does not occur even if the posture of the slave robot approaches a singular configuration.

Characteristics 1 through 6 above will be described in more detail.

First, “ Characteristic 1” will be described. In most of the conventional types of bilateral control, such as the force-reflecting type, the force-reflecting servo type, and the parallel type, the working force sensor for measuring the slave working force f s is mounted on the working end of the slave robot in order to enhance the feel of operation of the master-slave system. However, some systems often involve difficulty in mounting the working force sensor on the working end of the slave robot.

For example, in the case of a power-amplifying master-slave system, the slave robot has a high power actuator disposed thereon. Accordingly, the slave robot is required to be hardware that can withstand such high power. However, multi-axis force sensors, which are generally used as working force sensors, are delicate and expensive, and therefore, it is difficult to mount such a sensor on the working end of the high-power slave robot. Moreover, in the case of a master-slave system serving as a surgical robotic system, the slave robot is required to be invasive to the human body, and the hardware thereof needs to be subjected to high-level cleaning, disinfection, and sterilization (autoclave sterilization). It is difficult to mount a multi-axis force sensor, which is a complex electronic device, on the working end of such a slave robot.

In the case of the force-projecting bilateral control, it is simply required to mount a force sensor (i.e., an operating force sensor) on the master robot, which does not have such mounting difficulty. In addition, the slave robot can be provided in the simplest configuration only including an actuator and a displacement sensor. Thus, it is relatively easy to equip most systems with the force-projecting bilateral control.

Next, “ Characteristic 2” will be described. In most of the conventional types of bilateral control, such as the position-symmetric type and the force-reflecting bilateral control, the system is driven not directly by the master operating force f m applied to the master robot but in accordance with displacement error of the master robot caused by the master operating force f m . In this case, to enhance the feel of operation, the master robot is required to be so-called backdrivable so as to be movable even by human power. Moreover, to this end, it is necessary to reduce the inertial mass and the friction of the master robot as much as possible. Under such circumstances, in the case of the conventional bilateral control, the master robot is naturally a powerless and delicate mechanism with a low reduction ratio. This means that the master robot tends to lack the rigidity and output power required to provide a reaction force to the operator with high accuracy.

On the other hand, in the case of the force-projecting bilateral control, the system is driven by the master operating force f m applied to the master robot, and therefore, the master robot does not have to be backdrivable so long as the master operating force f m can be measured. Accordingly, in the case of the force-projecting bilateral control, the master robot can be provided as a robust and powerful mechanism with a high reduction ratio, and also can provide a reaction force to the operator with high accuracy. Note that since the mechanism is intended for the master robot, it is simply required to ensure that the mechanism is robust enough to merely withstand human power. Accordingly, being provided with the operating force sensor for measuring the master operating force f m is not a disadvantage when ensuring robustness, even if the operating force sensor is a multi-axis force sensor.

Next, “ Characteristic 3” will be described. In the case of both the force-reflecting type and the force-reflecting servo bilateral control where the working force sensor is disposed on the slave robot, particularly where the working force sensor is provided on the working end of the slave robot, the operator does not feel the slave dynamics, as can be appreciated from Expressions (9) and (11). On the other hand, the operator feels the master dynamics, and therefore, the critical norm “transparency” for the conventional bilateral control is realized by reducing the influence of the master dynamics to a negligible degree. That is, in the case of the conventional bilateral control, also for a different reason from that described in conjunction with “ Characteristic 2”, the master robot needs to be a powerless and delicate mechanism with a low reduction ratio.

However, the present inventor submits that there is room for reconsideration of the very norm “transparency” for the conventional master-slave systems, and therefore, proposes herein a new norm. More specifically, as opposed to the conventional norm “transparency” intended to render both the master dynamics and the slave dynamics “transparent” and provide the operator with a direct feel of operation of only manipulating the environment (i.e., a work object), the new norm is intended to “project” the master operating force f m from the operator as the force of driving the slave and also “project” the slave dynamics, even including the dynamics of the environment (i.e., a work object), as a master displacement, thereby providing the operator with the feel of operation of manipulating the environment (i.e., a work object) and even the slave robot. This new norm is referred to below as “projectivity”. It can be said that the more accurate the projection of the master operating force f m to the force of driving the slave becomes, or as the more accurate the projection of the dynamics of the environment (i.e., a work object) and the dynamics of the slave to a master displacement becomes, the higher the degree of projectivity becomes.

To put it qualitatively, in the case of a conventional master-slave system with high transparency, the operator does not feel the sense of the master-slave system, and therefore, feels as if he/she was directly manipulating the environment (i.e., a work object) using his/her own body. On the other hand, in the case of a master-slave system with high projectivity, the operator does not feel the sense of the master robot, and therefore, feels as if he/she was moving the slave robot using his/her own body and manipulating the environment (i.e., a work object) through the slave robot. That is, in other words, it can be said that the norm “transparency” aims to realize “the sense of manipulating a target with an actual human body”, whereas the norm “projectivity” aims to realize “the sense of manipulating a target via an exoskeleton”.

Therefore, the present inventor refers to the state where ideal projectivity is realized as “exoprojection”. By realizing exoprojection, it is rendered possible to allow the operator to feel as if the slave robot, whose portions at least other than the trunk operate mechanically independent of the master robot, is mechanically interlocked with the master robot even at the portions other than the trunk. Moreover, it is also rendered possible for the operator not to feel the sense of the master robot, which merely serves as an operating device, but to feel the slave robot, which serves as a working device, to be an exoskeleton actually being put on the operator himself/herself. The term “exoprojection” derives from such an effect.

In Non-Patent Document 2, on p. 575, Yokokohji et al. define “ideal response(s)”, which is synonymous with the term “transparency”, as follows:

“when the operator applies a certain operating force, positional responses x m and x s of master and slave arms always match force responses f m and f s regardless of the target to be handled”.

In accordance with the notation considering the scale ratio (S f , S p ) herein, the ideal responses can be represented as shown below.

[Expression 21]

x m =S p x s   (21)

[Expression 22]

S f f m =f s   (22)

In Non-Patent Document 2, the state where the ideal responses are realized is referred to as the state where object teleperception is possible. However, to realize such ideal responses, all dynamics of the master-slave system, along with inertia, need to be eliminated, which imposes a large burden on the control system, resulting in a high probability of unstable bilateral control (see Non-Patent Document 3). This can also be appreciated from the fact that the force control gain K f →∞ is essential to realize the force transparency (22) in Expression (11) for the force-reflecting servo bilateral control or in Expression (16) for the parallel bilateral control.

On the other hand, ideal responses for the“projectivity” defined by the present inventor can be represented as shown below.

[Expression 23]

x m =S p x s   (23)

[Expression 24]

J s T S f f m =τ s   (24)

The state where the ideal responses are realized is “exoprojection”. To realize exoprojection, it is not necessary to eliminate the slave dynamics. This is advantageous particularly for the power-amplifying master-slave system. In the power-amplifying master-slave system, the slave robot is often larger than the master robot, and is also dominant in terms of inertia. Reducing the burden of eliminating the dominant inertia of the slave robot contributes considerably to enhancement of stability of the control system.

Furthermore, as a norm, projectivity is more advantageous than transparency particularly in the case where the operator acquires the skills of “machine-friendly manipulation” in the master-slave system (with differences in structure, degree of freedom, and scale) in which the master robot and the slave robot have considerably different dynamics from each other.

For example, in the case of a master-slave system with a difference in scale where the master robot and the slave robot are significantly different in scale, by using projectivity as a norm, it is rendered possible to present the operator with scale effects not only of the environment (i.e., a work object) but also of the slave dynamics. The operator can be prompted to perform appropriate manipulation by being presented with the effect of inertia caused in the case where the slave robot is larger than the master robot (more specifically, in such a state where the master robot is moved around by the slave robot keeping on moving inertially), so that it can be expected that the operator makes manipulation efficient and optimal using his/her own skill. In the case of a system making “transparency”, rather than “projectivity”, as a norm, the operator is not presented with the scale effect of the slave dynamics, and therefore, it is not expected that the operator performs such efficient and optimal manipulation.

As described above, in the case of the force-projecting bilateral control, by disposing the operating force sensor at the operating end of the master robot, it is rendered possible to make the master dynamics transparent, as is indicated by Expression (20), and achieve high projectivity, i.e., exoprojection, to allow the operator to be provided with the sense of manipulating the environment (i.e., a work object) through the slave robot. In addition, in the case of the force-projecting bilateral control, to realize the force-related projectivity expressed by Expression (24), it is not necessary to make the force control gain K f infinite.

Next, “Characteristic 4” will be described. In the case of the master operating force f m =0 where the operator does not act on the master robot, the master-slave system is driven solely by an external force −f s . The external force −f s can be obtained for the position-symmetric type by Expression (7), also for the force-reflecting type by Expression (9), and further for the force-reflecting servo type by Expression (11), as shown below.

[Expression 25]

− f s =S j J m T ( M m {umlaut over (q)} m + m )+ J s −T ( M s {umlaut over (q)} s +r s )  (25)

[Expression 26]

− f=S f J m −T ( M m {umlaut over (q)} m +r m )  (26)

[Expression 27]

− f s =S f ( I+K f ) −1 J m −T ( M m {umlaut over (q)} m +r m )  (27)

Expressions (25) through (27) indicate that in the case of the conventional bilateral control (such as the position-symmetric type, the force-reflecting type, and the force-reflecting servo type), when the slave robot receives the external force −f s , the slave robot operates under the influence of the dynamics of the master robot, which is merely an operating device. Moreover, depending on the situation, there is a risk of unstable behavior being excited in the master-slave system solely by the external force −f s applied to the slave robot. Although not described herein, the same can be said of the parallel bilateral control. Regarding this problem, Non-Patent Document 4 points out on p. 24 that in the case of both the force-reflecting type and the force-reflecting servo bilateral control, when the operator takes his/her hand off the operating end of the master robot, the system tends to exhibit unstable behavior. The tendency becomes more marked particularly in the case where the force control gain K f is set high so as to increase transparency both in the force-reflecting servo type and the parallel bilateral control.

On the other hand, in the case of the force-projecting bilateral control, the external force −f s can be obtained by the following expression based on Expression (20).

[Expression 28]

− f s =J s −T ( M s {umlaut over (q)} s +r s )  (28)

The slave robot operates under the influence of its own dynamics upon reception of the external force −f s . Moreover, the external force −f s is not influenced by the master dynamics at all, and therefore, it can be appreciated that, where the master operating force f m =0, the connection from the master to the slave is automatically shut off, resulting in unilateral connection regardless of the force control gain K f . In this manner, in the case of the force-projecting bilateral control, there is no risk of unstable behavior being excited in the master-slave system solely by the external force −f s applied to the slave robot.

Next, “ Characteristic 5” will be described. In the master-slave systems, the master robots are provided only to be operated by humans, and therefore, the master robots are sized to such a scale as to be readily operable by humans, and are placed in environments comfortable to humans. However, the slave robots are required to employ a number of hardware structures so as to be operable in a wide variety of environments in accordance with tasks to be achieved. For example, the power-amplifying master-slave system requires the slave robot to output high power, and therefore, the slave robot might employ a hydraulic actuator, rather than an electromagnetic actuator. Also, in a master-slave system serving as a surgical robotic system, the slave robot might employ a pneumatic actuator. Furthermore, in most of the conventional types of bilateral control, the operator's will is reflected in specifying a target position of the slave robot, so that the slave robot is position-controlled.

As is well-known, when compared to the electromagnetic actuator, the hydraulic actuator and the pneumatic actuator have low position (trajectory) control performance. Accordingly, to accurately reflect the operator's will in the hydraulic or pneumatic actuator using the conventional bilateral control, it is necessary to apply a high-level and complicated positional control law, and implementing such a control law is expected to be difficult.

However, in the case of the force-projecting bilateral control, the operator's will is reflected in specifying a target driving force for the slave robot, and the slave robot is controlled in terms of driving force. In the case of force-projecting bilateral control employing a hydraulic or pneumatic actuator, the slave robot is controlled in terms of driving force by specifying a target pressure, rather than a target position, of the hydraulic or pneumatic actuator. Such pressure control of a hydraulic or pneumatic actuator is generally performed using a hydraulic or pneumatic control valve, and can be implemented without difficulty.

It is a matter of course that even if the force-projecting bilateral control is implemented so as to perform driving force control, the operator is not ensured to perform positional control on the slave robot with high accuracy, and it can be said that performing high-level and complex positional control, as is performed by a computer in accordance with the control law for the conventional bilateral control, is left to the operator's skill. However, it is without doubt that driving force control is implemented with ease, and the operator's will is accurately reflected in the slave robot as slave driving force. In addition, in the case of the force-projecting bilateral control, the operator can even intuitively know whether controllability of the hydraulic or pneumatic actuator is good, which is rendered less noticeable by the positional control law in the conventional bilateral control.

Furthermore, although the driving force control is left to the operator's skill, if there is any nonlinearity in slave dynamics which cannot be handled by the operator, the operator's skill can be backed up by superimposing dynamics compensation algorithms (e.g., gravity compensation and friction compensation) on the driving force control for the slave robot. In the case of the force-projecting bilateral control where the slave robot is controlled in terms of driving force, it is possible to simply superimpose control laws on each other, and vast knowledge on driving force control accumulated over a long history of robot control engineering can be utilized for backing up the operator's skill. For example, in one application, it is possible that the operator is allowed to feel the inertia of the slave robot, which is useful in manipulation, whereas nonlinear terms for the slave robot, which make manipulation difficult, are eliminated through compensation. Alternatively, it is also possible that different types of low-gain trajectory control for the slave robot are superimposed as if the operator was taken by the hand over the exoskeleton and guided, or a virtual wall to limit the range of movement of the slave robot is superimposed on the control for the slave robot. In the case where the slave robot is position-controlled, it is not necessarily possible to simply superimpose such control laws on each other, as described earlier.

Next, “Characteristic 6” will be described. In the master-slave system, the master robot is required to have operability, and the slave robot is required to have workability. To improve operability, the master robot needs to be designed ergonomically, whereas to improve workability, the slave robot needs to be designed so as to be adapted to tasks to be achieved. Accordingly, the master robot and the slave robot are naturally different in structure. Such a master-slave system including a master robot and a slave robot which are different in structure will be referred to as a double-structure master-slave system.

In the case of a single-structure master-slave system, there are limitations to enhancing both operability and workability. Accordingly, high-level master-slave systems inevitably become of a double-structure type. Moreover, it is typical of such a double-structure master-slave system to perform control in the work coordinate system, and also in the study up to this point herein, the control laws are premised by the control being performed in the work coordinate system.

In general, when a robot is position-controlled in the work coordinate system, the singular configuration problem occurs. The singular configuration refers to the posture of the robot (singular posture) for which the Jacobian matrix is irregular (i.e., no inverse matrix is obtained). At the singular configuration, the direction of the movement of the robot in the work coordinate system is limited. In the case where the robot's target trajectory is determined in the work coordinate system, the joint velocity for realizing the target trajectory becomes excessively high in the vicinity of the singular configuration. In addition, the actual robot can only have a limited joint velocity, so that there is a possibility where positional control in the work coordinate system might fail in the vicinity of the singular configuration. This encapsulates the singular configuration problem. Even if the position control law does not involve the inverse of the Jacobian matrix in computation, as in the case of Expression (6), positional control failure also occurs in the vicinity of the singular configuration. This is physical failure accompanied by coordinate transformation. Accordingly, such positional control failure cannot be prevented by computational contrivance.

In the conventional master-slave systems, the slave robot is position-controlled, but if the positional control is performed in the work coordinate system, the singular configuration problem occurs. More specifically, positional control failure occurs in the vicinity of the singular configuration unless approach to the vicinity of the singular configuration is avoided. On the other hand, if the slave robot is caused to move so as to avoid the vicinity of the singular configuration in order not to risk failure, additional disadvantages which are difficult to overcome arise as follows:

i) the working space of the slave robot is narrowed, leading to the need to increase the scale of the robot more than necessary; and

ii) the singular configuration for the slave robot cannot be positively utilized for task achievement.

Note that Non-Patent Document 5 describes in detail an approach to positively utilize the singular configuration.

As a countermeasure against the singular configuration problem, Non-Patent Document 6 describes on p. 476 a method in which, when any joint of the master robot or the slave robot reaches the limit of the range of movement or a singular configuration, feedback to the master is made in order to cause an opposite force to be exerted. Moreover, to solve the singular configuration problem with the double-structure master-slave system, Non-Patent Document 7 proposes a method in which assist gain is adjusted in accordance with the distance from a singular configuration (manipulability measure). Both of these methods are a kind of approach to avoid the singular configuration by causing the feel of manipulation to be heavy in the vicinity of the singular configuration and thereby allowing the operator to know that the singular configuration is approaching. That is, even by using the approaches of Non-Patent Documents 6 and 7, it is still not possible to overcome the aforementioned disadvantages i) and ii).

As another countermeasure to the singular configuration problem, Non-Patent Document 8 proposes a singular configuration consistent approach. This approach is a control method utilizing the adjugate of the Jacobian matrix, and inhibits the joint velocity from becoming excessively high and thereby preventing positional control failure. In addition, it is rendered possible to eliminate the need to avoid the singular configuration and thereby overcome the disadvantages i) and ii). However, although no failure occurs, the joint velocity is still limited, and therefore, detriment to operability in the vicinity of the singular configuration is unavoidable. Non-Patent Document 8 has an approach devised to not cause detriment to operability, and the approach of Non-Patent Document 8 can suppress such detriment but cannot be used to cause no detriment at all.

On the other hand, in the case of the force-projecting bilateral control, the slave robot is not position-controlled, but is controlled in terms of driving force. For example, in the case where the driving force control is implemented on the slave robot, as in Expression (19), it is simply necessary to obtain the transpose J s T of the Jacobian matrix on the basis of differential kinematics, and the inverse J s −1 of the Jacobian matrix does not need to be obtained. In the case of the force-projecting bilateral control where the driving force control is performed on the slave robot, inherently, the slave robot does not have the singular configuration problem, therefore, it is not necessary to avoid the singular configuration for the slave robot, and there are no such disadvantages i) and ii) as mentioned above. In other words, the force-projecting bilateral control has the following advantages:

i′) the entire range of movement (i.e., the entire working space) of the slave robot can be utilized; and

ii′) the singular configuration for the slave robot can be positively utilized for task achievement.

Non-Patent Document 9 mentions on p. 116 a “position-force loop” as control in the opposite direction to the force-reflecting bilateral control and the force-reflecting servo bilateral control, but no other detailed description of such control is given in the document, and therefore, conceivably this control does not correspond to the force-projecting bilateral control.

Furthermore, Non-Patent Document 9 describes on p. 116 that “the position-force loop is not implemented effectively”, and also describes the reason as follows: “force control for the slave robot is unstable”. These descriptions suggest that the common technical knowledge in the art is that implementation of the “position-force loop” is extremely difficult or even impossible.

PRIOR ART DOCUMENTS

Patent Documents

Patent Document 1: Japanese Patent No. 5105450

Patent Document 2: Japanese Patent Application No. 2013-28989

Non-Patent Documents

Non-Patent Document 1: Miyazaki and Hagihara, “Parallel Control Method for a Bilateral Master-Slave Manipulator”, Journal of the Robotics Society of Japan, Vol. 7, No. 5, pp. 446-452, 1989

Non-Patent Document 2: Yokokohji and Yoshikawa, “Maneuverability of Master-Slave Telemanipulation Systems”, Transactions of the Society of Instrument and Control Engineers, Vol. 26, No. 5, pp. 572-579, 1990

Non-Patent Document 3: Tachi and Sakaki, “Impedance Controlled Master Slave Manipulation System Part I, Basic Concept and Application to the System with Time Delay”, Journal of the Robotics Society of Japan, Vol. 8, No. 3, pp. 241-252, 1990

Non-Patent Document 4: Yoshinada, “A Study on the Large-Scale Bilateral Manipulator”, Tokyo institute of Technology Doctoral Thesis, 2012

Non-Patent Document 5: Kotosaka and Ohtaki, “Selective Utilization of Actuator for a Humanoid Robot by Singular Configuration”, Journal of the Robotics Society of Japan, Vol. 25, No. 8, pp. 1259-1265, 2007

Non-Patent Document 6: Arai and Nakano, “Bilateral Master-Slave Control for Manipulators with Different Configurations”, Journal of the Robotics Society of Japan, Vol. 4, No. 5, pp. 469-479, 1986

Non-Patent Document 7: Yoshinaga, Shimogawa, and Ozaki, “Different Configuration Master-Slave Robot Arms System by Two Industrial Robots”, Proceedings of Robotics and Mechatronics Conference 2008, The Japan Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1A1-G16, 2008

Non-Patent Document 8: Tsumaki, Kotera, Nenchev, and Uchiyama, “Singularity-Consistent Teleoperation of a 6-DOF Manipulator”, Journal of the Robotics Society of Japan, Vol. 16, No. 2, pp. 195-204, 1998

Non-Patent Document 9: Thurston L. Brooks, “Telerobotic Response Requirements”, Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, pp. 113-120, 1990

Non-Patent Document 10: D. L. Pieper, “The Kinematics of Manipulators under Computer Control”, Stanford Artificial Intelligence Report, memo no. AI-72, 1968

Non-Patent Document 11: Ryo Kikuuwe, Satoshi Yasukouchi, Hideo Fujimoto, and Motoji Yamamoto, “Proxy-Based Sliding Mode Control: A Safer Extension of PID Position Control”, IEEE Transactions on Robotics, Vol. 26, No. 4, pp. 670-683, 2010

DISCLOSURE OF THE INVENTION

Problems to be Solved by the Invention

As described above, the force-projecting bilateral control has a number of advantages which the conventional bilateral control lacks, but on the other hand, the force-projecting bilateral control has the following problems to be solved.

Specifically, in the case of the force-projecting bilateral control, the slave robot is not position-controlled, as described in conjunction with “Characteristic 6”, but is controlled in terms of driving force, so that there is no singular configuration problem with the slave robot. However, in the case of the force-projecting bilateral control, the master robot is position-controlled, and if the positional control is performed in the work coordinate system, the singular configuration problem arises in the master robot, rather than in the slave robot. Even if the position control law does not involve the inverse of the Jacobian matrix in computation, as in the case of Expression (18), physical failure is accompanied by coordinate transformation, so that positional control failure also occurs in the vicinity of a singular configuration.

The present invention has been achieved under the above circumstances, with a problem thereof being to provide a master-slave system capable of solving a singular configuration problem for both a master robot and a slave robot.

Solution to the Problems

After diligent studies to solve the above problem, the p

CLAIMS

Claims ( 5 )

The invention claimed is:

1. A master-slave system having a master robot and a slave robot and being subjected to bilateral control, the master robot being an admittance-type haptic device manipulated by an operator, the slave robot being at least electrically connected to the master robot and having portions at least other than the trunk operating mechanically independent of the master robot, the system comprising:

at least one master actuator for generating a master driving force to position-control the master robot;

at least one slave actuator for generating a slave driving force to control the slave robot in terms of driving force;

at least one master displacement sensor for measuring a master displacement for the master robot;

at least one slave displacement sensor for measuring a slave displacement for the slave robot;

at least one operating force sensor for measuring a master operating force applied to the master robot by the operator;

a master target displacement calculating device for mapping the slave displacement and thereby obtaining a master target displacement which is a target value for the master displacement corresponding to the slave displacement; and

a slave target driving force calculating device for obtaining a slave target driving force which is a target value for the slave driving force, on the basis of the master operating force, wherein,

the slave actuator is adapted to generate the slave driving force on the basis of the slave target driving force, whereas the master actuator is adapted to generate the master driving force on the basis of the master target displacement and the master displacement, thereby:

(1) eliminating the need for a working force sensor adapted for the bilateral control and to measure a slave working force applied to the environment by the slave robot; and

(2) allowing the operator to feel the sense of slave dynamics without feeling the sense of master dynamics, and

the mapping by the master target displacement calculating device is predefined such that a set of master target displacements excludes a singular configuration for the master robot, thereby

(3) allowing a singular configuration problem for both the master robot and the slave robot to be solved in the entire range of movement of the slave robot regardless of whether the slave robot and the master robot have the same structure or different structures.

2. The master-slave system according to claim 1 , wherein,

the master target displacement calculating device obtains the master target displacement corresponding to the slave displacement by calculating inverse kinematics of the master robot in a master joint coordinate system for the master robot, whereby,

the positional control of the master robot by the master actuator is performed in the master joint coordinate system.

3. The master-slave system according to claim 2 , wherein the master robot has a mechanism configured such that the inverse kinematics of the master robot is analytically calculated without requiring numerically iterative convergence calculation.

4. The master-slave system according to claim 3 , wherein,

the master robot has six or less degrees of freedom,

among the six or less degrees of freedom, three consecutive degrees of freedom are permitted by three rotational joints constituting a single serial link mechanism, and

rotation axes of the three rotational joints or extensions thereto cross one another at a point.

5. The master-slave system according to claim 1 , wherein,

the master robot is selected from among a plurality of master robots,

the slave robot is selected from among a plurality of slave robots electrically connectable to any of the master robots, and

the selected master robot and the selected slave robot are electrically connected to each other.

US15/033,688

2013-11-07

2014-11-05

Master-slave system

Active

2035-02-01

US9855653B2

( en )

Applications Claiming Priority (3)

Application Number

Priority Date

Filing Date

Title

JP2013230820A

JP6201126B2

( en )

2013-11-07

2013-11-07

Master-slave system

JP2013-230820

2013-11-07

PCT/JP2014/079304

WO2015068716A1

( en )

2013-11-07

2014-11-05

Master-slave system

Publications (2)

Publication Number

Publication Date

US20160279788A1

US20160279788A1 ( en )

2016-09-29

US9855653B2

true

US9855653B2 ( en )

2018-01-02

Family

ID=53041493

Family Applications (1)

Application Number

Title

Priority Date

Filing Date

US15/033,688

Active

2035-02-01

US9855653B2

( en )

2013-11-07

2014-11-05

Master-slave system

Country Status (4)

Country

Link

US

( 1 )

US9855653B2

( en )

EP

( 1 )

EP3067162B1

( en )

JP

( 1 )

JP6201126B2

( en )

WO

( 1 )

WO2015068716A1

( en )

Cited By (1)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party

Publication number

Priority date

Publication date

Assignee

Title

US11305431B2

( en )

*

2016-11-10

2022-04-19

Cognibotics Ab

System and method for instructing a robot

Families Citing this family (42)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party

Publication number

Priority date

Publication date

Assignee

Title

JP6547164B2

( en )

2014-04-30

2019-07-24

株式会社人機一体

Master slave system

JP6550605B2

( en )

*

2014-12-02

2019-07-31

Ｓｏｉｎｎ株式会社

Movement transfer device, movement transfer method and program

JP6408435B2

( en )

*

2015-07-16

2018-10-17

国立大学法人埼玉大学

Bidirectional remote control system using functional electrical stimulation

US10562191B2

( en )

*

2015-12-29

2020-02-18

Robomotive Laboratories LLC

Method of controlling devices with sensation of applied force

US10065311B1

( en )

*

2016-06-08

2018-09-04

X Development Llc

Singularity handling for robot jogging

US10821614B2

( en )

2016-11-11

2020-11-03

Sarcos Corp.

Clutched joint modules having a quasi-passive elastic actuator for a robotic assembly

US10828767B2

( en )

2016-11-11

2020-11-10

Sarcos Corp.

Tunable actuator joint modules having energy recovering quasi-passive elastic actuators with internal valve arrangements

CN110536779A

( en )

*

2017-03-26

2019-12-03

詹尼斯机器人移动技术加拿大公司

robotic arm

CN107932506B

( en )

*

2017-11-15

2020-10-16

电子科技大学

Force feedback bilateral teleoperation stability control method

US10843330B2

( en )

*

2017-12-07

2020-11-24

Sarcos Corp.

Resistance-based joint constraint for a master robotic system

US11331809B2

( en )

2017-12-18

2022-05-17

Sarcos Corp.

Dynamically controlled robotic stiffening element

JP6962229B2

( en )

*

2018-02-15

2021-11-05

オムロン株式会社

Central controller, control method and program

CN108803344B

( en )

*

2018-07-25

2019-11-22

西北工业大学

A Symmetric Predictive Control Method for Bilateral Teleoperation of Robots Based on Mode Switching

CN109048897B

( en )

*

2018-08-14

2021-01-15

清华大学深圳研究生院

Method for teleoperation of master-slave robot

CN111267090A

( en )

*

2018-12-04

2020-06-12

深圳先进技术研究院

Master-slave control system and method for double-arm robot

US11351675B2

( en )

2018-12-31

2022-06-07

Sarcos Corp.

Robotic end-effector having dynamic stiffening elements for conforming object interaction

US10906191B2

( en )

2018-12-31

2021-02-02

Sarcos Corp.

Hybrid robotic end effector

US11241801B2

( en )

2018-12-31

2022-02-08

Sarcos Corp.

Robotic end effector with dorsally supported actuation mechanism

CN110340894B

( en )

*

2019-07-18

2020-10-16

浙江大学

Teleoperation system self-adaptive multilateral control method based on fuzzy logic

CN110262256B

( en )

*

2019-07-18

2020-09-11

浙江大学

Multilateral self-adaptive sliding mode control method of nonlinear teleoperation system

CN110977974B

( en )

*

2019-12-11

2021-06-01

遨博（北京）智能科技有限公司

Admittance control method, device and system for avoiding singular position type of robot

WO2022024238A1

( en )

*

2020-07-29

2022-02-03

日本電信電話株式会社

Tactile control system, master device, slave device, tactile control method, and tactile control program

US11833676B2

( en )

2020-12-07

2023-12-05

Sarcos Corp.

Combining sensor output data to prevent unsafe operation of an exoskeleton

CN112720502A

( en )

*

2021-01-11

2021-04-30

深圳市正运动技术有限公司

Control method of single-multi-axis manipulator

DE102022107130B4

( en )

2021-03-26

2023-02-23

Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt e.V.

Method of stabilizing a haptic teleoperation system with a custom haptic feedback controller

JP2022164073A

( en )

*

2021-04-15

2022-10-27

川崎重工業株式会社

Robot system, and control method and control program of the same

CN114311031B

( en )

*

2021-12-29

2024-05-28

上海微创医疗机器人（集团）股份有限公司

Master-slave end delay test method, system, storage medium and equipment for surgical robot

WO2023135902A1

( en )

*

2022-01-14

2023-07-20

株式会社Ｎｔｔドコモ

Human augmentation platform device and physical ability augmentation method

US11826907B1

( en )

2022-08-17

2023-11-28

Sarcos Corp.

Robotic joint system with length adapter

EP4563290A4

( en )

*

2022-08-23

2025-09-24

Riverfield Inc

SURGICAL ROBOT AND CONTROL UNIT FOR SURGICAL ROBOT

US11717956B1

( en )

2022-08-29

2023-08-08

Sarcos Corp.

Robotic joint system with integrated safety

CN115355794B

( en )

*

2022-10-20

2023-01-20

合肥合滨智能机器人有限公司

Master position testing method and master-slave distance accuracy and repeatability testing system

WO2024098070A1

( en )

2022-11-04

2024-05-10

Sarcos Corp.

Robotic end-effector having dynamic stiffening elements with resilient spacers for conforming object interaction

CN115648161B

( en )

*

2022-11-11

2024-11-26

中国科学院沈阳自动化研究所

A design method for the ratio mapping factor between the master and slave hands of a teleoperated robot

US11924023B1

( en )

2022-11-17

2024-03-05

Sarcos Corp.

Systems and methods for redundant network communication in a robot

US11897132B1

( en )

2022-11-17

2024-02-13

Sarcos Corp.

Systems and methods for redundant network communication in a robot

CN115774408A

( en )

*

2022-12-06

2023-03-10

澎湃(浙江自贸区)机器人技术有限公司

Wall-climbing robot primary-secondary control system

CN115813568B

( en )

*

2022-12-29

2025-10-24

南京工程学院

A robot-assisted puncture system and its master-slave hand control accuracy compensation method

US20240375274A1

( en )

*

2023-05-10

2024-11-14

Southwest Research Institute

Coordinated motion of a manipulator and mobile base

CN117021118B

( en )

*

2023-10-08

2023-12-15

中北大学

Dynamic compensation method for digital twin track error of parallel robot

CN119097425B

( en )

*

2024-11-06

2025-07-15

哈尔滨思哲睿智能医疗设备股份有限公司

Motion control method and device of endoscopic surgery robot, electronic equipment and storage medium

CN119077752B

( en )

*

2024-11-06

2025-03-18

哈尔滨思哲睿智能医疗设备股份有限公司

A robot arm control method, device, electronic device and storage medium

Citations (12)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party

Publication number

Priority date

Publication date

Assignee

Title

JPH07136949A

( en )

1993-11-16

1995-05-30

Fujitsu Ltd

How to avoid singularity of master / slave manipulator

JP2001300871A

( en )

2000-04-18

2001-10-30

Kawasaki Heavy Ind Ltd

Master arm device

US20030034994A1

( en )

*

1993-10-01

2003-02-20

Massie Thomas H.

Force reflecting haptic interface

US20060293617A1

( en )

*

2004-02-05

2006-12-28

Reability Inc.

Methods and apparatuses for rehabilitation and training

US20070225620A1

( en )

*

2006-03-23

2007-09-27

Carignan Craig R

Portable Arm Exoskeleton for Shoulder Rehabilitation

US20070282228A1

( en )

*

2004-02-05

2007-12-06

Omer Einav

Methods and Apparatus for Rehabilitation and Training

US20080009771A1

( en )

*

2006-03-29

2008-01-10

Joel Perry

Exoskeleton

JP2009012125A

( en )

2007-07-05

2009-01-22

Shin Meiwa Ind Co Ltd

Power assist robot

US20100041991A1

( en )

2006-09-25

2010-02-18

Koninklijke Philips Electronics N.V.

Haptic feedback medical scanning methods and systems

JP2011189445A

( en )

2010-03-15

2011-09-29

Ritsumeikan

Master-slave system and control method thereof

JP2014157548A

( en )

2013-02-18

2014-08-28

Kyushu Univ

Force control device using admittance control and position control device

US20170202724A1

( en )

*

2013-12-09

2017-07-20

President And Fellows Of Harvard College

Assistive Flexible Suits, Flexible Suit Systems, and Methods for Making and Control Thereof to Assist Human Mobility

Family Cites Families (2)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party

Publication number

Priority date

Publication date

Assignee

Title

JP2011110620A

( en )

*

2009-11-24

2011-06-09

Toyota Industries Corp

Method of controlling action of robot, and robot system

JP2013028989A

( en )

2011-07-29

2013-02-07

Daiken Corp

Method for manufacturing interior material having stone texture

2013

2013-11-07

JP

JP2013230820A

patent/JP6201126B2/en

active

Active

2014

2014-11-05

WO

PCT/JP2014/079304

patent/WO2015068716A1/en

not_active

Ceased

2014-11-05

EP

EP14861009.0A

patent/EP3067162B1/en

active

Active

2014-11-05

US

US15/033,688

patent/US9855653B2/en

active

Active

Patent Citations (13)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party

Publication number

Priority date

Publication date

Assignee

Title

US20030034994A1

( en )

*

1993-10-01

2003-02-20

Massie Thomas H.

Force reflecting haptic interface

JPH07136949A

( en )

1993-11-16

1995-05-30

Fujitsu Ltd

How to avoid singularity of master / slave manipulator

JP2001300871A

( en )

2000-04-18

2001-10-30

Kawasaki Heavy Ind Ltd

Master arm device

US20060293617A1

( en )

*

2004-02-05

2006-12-28

Reability Inc.

Methods and apparatuses for rehabilitation and training

US20070282228A1

( en )

*

2004-02-05

2007-12-06

Omer Einav

Methods and Apparatus for Rehabilitation and Training

US20070225620A1

( en )

*

2006-03-23

2007-09-27

Carignan Craig R

Portable Arm Exoskeleton for Shoulder Rehabilitation

US20080009771A1

( en )

*

2006-03-29

2008-01-10

Joel Perry

Exoskeleton

US20100041991A1

( en )

2006-09-25

2010-02-18

Koninklijke Philips Electronics N.V.

Haptic feedback medical scanning methods and systems

JP2009012125A

( en )

2007-07-05

2009-01-22

Shin Meiwa Ind Co Ltd

Power assist robot

JP2011189445A

( en )

2010-03-15

2011-09-29

Ritsumeikan

Master-slave system and control method thereof

JP5105450B2

( en )

2010-03-15

2012-12-26

学校法人立命館

Master-slave system and control method thereof

JP2014157548A

( en )

2013-02-18

2014-08-28

Kyushu Univ

Force control device using admittance control and position control device

US20170202724A1

( en )

*

2013-12-09

2017-07-20

President And Fellows Of Harvard College

Assistive Flexible Suits, Flexible Suit Systems, and Methods for Making and Control Thereof to Assist Human Mobility

Non-Patent Citations (11)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party

Title

Arai et al., Bilateral Master-Slave Control for Manipulators with Different Configurations, Journal of the Robotics Society of Japan, vol. 4 No. 5, pp. 469-479, Oct. 1986.

Brooks, Telerobotic Response Requirements, Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man ad Cybernetics, pp. 113-120, 1990.

Kikuuwe et al., Proxy-Based Sliding Mode Control: A Safer Extension of PID Position Control, IEEE Transactions on Robotics, vol. 26, No. 4, pp. 670-683, Aug. 2010.

Kotosaka et al., Selective Utilization of Actuator for a Humanoid Robot by Singular Configuration, Journal of the Robotics Society of Japan, vol. 25 No. 8, pp. 1259-1265, Nov. 2007.

Miyazaki, et al., Parallel Control Method for a Bilateral Master-Slave Manipulator, Journal of the Robotics Society of Japan, vol. 7, No. 5, pp. 446-452, Oct. 1989.

Pieper, The Kinematics of Manipulators Under Computer Control, Stanford Artificial Intelligence Report, memo No. AI-72, Oct. 1968.

Tachi et al., Impedance Controlled Master-Slave Manipulation System Part I: Basic Concept and Application to the System with Time Delay, Journal of the Robotics Society of Japan, vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 241-252, Jun. 1990.

Tsumaki et al., Singularity-Consistent Teleoperation of a 6-DOF Manipulator, Journal of the Robotics Society of Japan vol. 16, No. 2, pp. 195-204, Mar. 1998.

Yokokohji, et al., Maneuverability of Master-Slave Telemanipulation Systems, Transactions of the Society of Instrument and Control Engineers, vol. 26, No. 5, pp. 572-579, 1990.

Yoshinada, A Study on the Large Scale Bilateral Manipulator, Tokyo Institute of Technology Doctoral Thesis, 2012.

Yoshinaga et al., Different Configuration Master-Slave Robot Arms System by Two Industrial Robots, Proceedings of Robotics and Mechatronics Conference 2008, The Japan Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1A1-G16, Jun. 2008.

Cited By (1)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party

Publication number

Priority date

Publication date

Assignee

Title

US11305431B2

( en )

*

2016-11-10

2022-04-19

Cognibotics Ab

System and method for instructing a robot

Also Published As

Publication number

Publication date

WO2015068716A1

( en )

2015-05-14

EP3067162A1

( en )

2016-09-14

EP3067162B1

( en )

2018-07-11

EP3067162A4

( en )

2017-08-09

JP2015089605A

( en )

2015-05-11

US20160279788A1

( en )

2016-09-29

JP6201126B2

( en )

2017-09-27

Similar Documents

Publication

Publication Date

Title

EP3067162B1

( en )

2018-07-11

Master-slave system

US10239201B2

( en )

2019-03-26

Master-slave system

JP7556920B2

( en )

2024-09-26

METHOD FOR CONTROLLING A MECHANICAL SYSTEM, CONTROLLER FOR A MECHANICAL SYSTEM, ROBOT MANIPULATOR, AND NON-TRANSITORY COMPUTER-READABLE STORAGE MEDIUM

Koivumäki et al.

2016

Stability-guaranteed impedance control of hydraulic robotic manipulators

US10932874B2

( en )

2021-03-02

Remote control robot system

US11305431B2

( en )

2022-04-19

System and method for instructing a robot

US8249746B2

( en )

2012-08-21

Method and device to regulate an automated manipulator

CN106945043B

( en )

2020-05-08

A multi-arm collaborative control system for a master-slave teleoperated surgical robot

JP2001157975A

( en )

2001-06-12

Robot control device

Azar et al.

2017

Control design approaches for parallel robot manipulators: a review

KR20170016631A

( en )

2017-02-14

System, method for controlling redundant robot, and a recording medium having computer readable program for executing the method

Surdilovic et al.

2010

Development of collaborative robots (cobots) for flexible human-integrated assembly automation

Marinho et al.

2012

Manipulator control based on the dual quaternion framework for intuitive teleoperation using kinect

Saków et al.

2017

Self-sensing teleoperation system based on 1-dof pneumatic manipulator

Nath et al.

2009

Teleoperation with kinematically redundant robot manipulators with sub-task objectives

Selvaggio et al.

2017

Towards a self-collision aware teleoperation framework for compound robots

Hace et al.

2010

Bilateral teleoperation by sliding mode control and reaction force observer

Cheung et al.

2009

Cooperative control of a multi-arm system using semi-autonomous telemanipulation and adaptive impedance

Malysz et al.

2009

Dual-master teleoperation control of kinematically redundant robotic slave manipulators

WO2018153474A1

( en )

2018-08-30

Robot system, method for programming a robot manipulator and control system

Top et al.

2019

How to increase crane control usability: an intuitive hmi for remotely operated cranes in industry and construction

Chen et al.

2011

Robust trajectories following control of a 2-link robot manipulator via coordinate transformation for manufacturing applications

Zhang et al.

2014

A combined approach for master-slave robotic surgery system control based on Jacobian and PD algorithm

Sakurai et al.

2026

Modal System Design for Robot Manipulators with Combined Kinematic Redundancy and Actuation Redundancy

Yorozu et al.

2010

Vibration suppression control of 2-mass resonant system for haptic tele-operation

Legal Events

Date

Code

Title

Description

2016-05-02

AS

Assignment

Owner name : MUSCLE CORPORATION, JAPAN

Free format text : ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNORS:KANAOKA, KATSUYA;KIKUUWE, RYO;SIGNING DATES FROM 20160428 TO 20160502;REEL/FRAME:038433/0189

2017-12-13

STCF

Information on status: patent grant

Free format text : PATENTED CASE

2021-06-23

MAFP

Maintenance fee payment

Free format text : PAYMENT OF MAINTENANCE FEE, 4TH YR, SMALL ENTITY (ORIGINAL EVENT CODE: M2551); ENTITY STATUS OF PATENT OWNER: SMALL ENTITY

Year of fee payment : 4

2022-01-19

AS

Assignment

Owner name : MAN-MACHINE SYNERGY EFFECTORS, INC., JAPAN

Free format text : ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNOR:MUSCLE CORPORATION;REEL/FRAME:058686/0968

Effective date : 20211101

2025-06-25

MAFP

Maintenance fee payment

Free format text : PAYMENT OF MAINTENANCE FEE, 8TH YR, SMALL ENTITY (ORIGINAL EVENT CODE: M2552); ENTITY STATUS OF PATENT OWNER: SMALL ENTITY

Year of fee payment : 8

Related documents

• Generating augmented reality experiences utilizing physical objects to … — Meta Platforms Technologies, Llc (US20260037214A1)#653960
• Virtual reality system using multiple force arrays for a solver — DeepMotion, Inc. (US10657696B2)#653961
• Tracking position of device inside-out for virtual reality interactivity — Sony Interactive Entertainment America Llc (US10535153B2)#653962
• Augmented reality system with spatialized audio tied to user manipulated … — Magic Leap, Inc. (US11231770B2)#653963
• Big data-based autonomous flight drone system and autonomous flight method … — Rgblab Co., Ltd. (US20210390867A1)#653964