WA Melchiorri

Robotic Telemanipulation:
General Aspects and Control Aspects

Claudio Melchiorri
DEIS- LAR, Università di Bologna

Via Risorgimento 2, 40136 Bologna
email: [email protected]
– p.1/139
Telemanipulation
Summary:
1. Introduction;
2. General description of a telemanipulation system:
3. Overview on applications and existing devices;
4. Force reflection in telemanipulation:
5. Introduction to the Passivity Theory;
6. Modelling of telemanipulation systems;
7. Control techniques for telemanipulation systems:
8. Performance measures for telemanipulation systems;
9. Demos (experimental setup).
Introduction - History - Applications
Claudio Melchiorri

– p.3/139
Telemanipulation - Introduction
Development of different “TELE-techologies”:
TELEgraphy;
TELEphony;
TELEvision;
...
TELEoperation:
capability of performing remote manipulation of objects/environments.
Teleoperations is one of the first fields in robotics to be developed:

applications (nuclear, medicine) are dated back to the late 40’s.

Probably, the initial noticeable research interest, despite the existing operating devices,
has not been fully respected:
technological reasons;
different location of the operator and robotic device.
Telemanipulation - Introduction
Some basic definitions:
HUMAN OPERATOR: person performing the observation and control (supervision of the
development) of a desired task.
TELEOPERATOR: machine that extends (to a remote location) the sensing and
manipulation capabilities of an human operator.
TELEROBOT: advanced form of teleoperator, usually supervisioned by an human

operator by means of a control systems.
Telem-Intro - Claudio Melchiorri – p.5/139
General description of a telemanipulation system

In current terminology, a telemanipulator is a complex electro-mechanical system usually
encompassing:
a master (or local) device,
a slave (or remote) device,
a communication channel, interconnecting the master and the slave.
The overall system is interfaced on one side (the master) with a human operator, and on
the other (the slave) with the environment.

Operator Master Comm. line Slave Environ.

Both master and slave devices have their own local control system, with a very large
variety of complexity and sophistication levels, which allow the execution of desired
tasks.

There are some features of this kind of manipulators which are not present in an “usual”
robotic manipulation system.
1. A human operator is present for the high-level control of the activities.
2. Since the operator represents the main “controller” of the system, he/she requires to be informed about the
evolution of the task and about some pertinent information:

data feedback from the slave site to the master one,

development of a proper user interface.

Signals fed back to the master may be related to

forces applied to the environment,

relevant positions of the slave,

graphical video data,

tactile or acoustic information,

...
3. A communication channel is present between the master and the slave sites.
This channel may represent a source of problems when a time-delay is present, since, as well known from the
control theory, delays in a feedback loop may generate instability.
Even time-delays of the order of the tenth of a second may create instability problems.
The main features of the components of a telemanipulator are the following.
The master.
The master, or local system, is the interface through which the operator specifies
commands to the whole device. Typical features of the master are:
Capability of assigning tasks to the slave and providing the operator with relevant
information about the task development.
“TELEPRESENCE”
Several implementative solutions have been adopted: joysticks and/or consoles,
exoskeletons, ...
Different types of signals may be reflected by these devices to the operator, from
simple graphical data to full kinetostatic information.
Capability of acquiring and processing data from both the operator and the slave.
Typical elaborations are filtering, prediction, delay compensation, modelling of
remote and local dynamics, and so on.

The slave.
The slave is the part of the teleoperator which directly interacts with the environment for
task execution. Requirements similar to the master may be specified for the slave
system:
A robotic system for the interaction with the environment and the execution of the
task planned by the operator.
This part, usually provided with autonomous features, has to be in some way
customised to operate in particular environments, e.g. submarine, outer space,
nuclear areas.
Note that the kinematics and the dynamics of the remote manipulator may be
different from those of the local one (problems when telepresence is needed).
A signal acquisition and processing.
Sensory capability is a main requirement for the slave device, which is often
equipped with video cameras, force/tactile sensors, proximity sensors, and so on.
The capability of data processing. Also the remote site must be able to elaborate
the information needed for task execution. In fact, besides other considerations, the
destabilising effects originated by communication delays and/or restricted
bandwidths of transmission must be compensated locally, providing the slave
system with a certain degree of autonomy.
The communication line.
The communication line represents the link between the master and slave sites.
Different platforms may be used for this purpose, from radio connections by means of
satellites to cables for underwater operations.
Main drawback. Time delay in the transmission of signals:
physical delay in the transmission line (e.g. in a long satellite communication),
limited bandwidth of the hardware.
The time delay, in some case not constant, can originate noticeable instability problems
if proper compensating actions are not taken.

The communication line.
A very common choice in practical applications is to transmit velocity to the slave and
force to the master (for the kinestatical coupling).
Obviously, the choice of reflecting forces is not the only possible. For example, 3D
graphic simulation could be used as well. Nevertheless, coordination based on force
greatly improves the execution of tasks with respect to the case of, for example, only
visual feedback.
Anyway, the transmission of force information originates relevant instability problems

when time-delays are present in the communication line (problem noticed since the first
implementation of telemanipulation schemes with force reflection in 1965).
Overview on applications
1600: very simple devices designed as arm extensions;
early 1900: crude teleoperators for earth moving, constructions, and related tasks;
’40s: human limb prostheses (arm hooks activated by the parts of the human body);
about 1945: first master-slave teleoperator (mechanical pantograph) for radioactive
material manipulation;
Development of Telemanipulation
1954: electro-mechanical master-slave teleoperator developed by Goertz at Argonne
National Lab.;
late 50’s interest in applying this new technology to human limb prostheses. Kobrinskii
(Moscow) in 1960 developed a lower-arm prosthesis driven by myoelectric signal
from the upper arm;
60’s Rapid developments in the medical field, with teleoperators installed on the
wheelchairs of quadraplegics and commanded by the tongue;
60’s: Telepresence, force reflection, two-arm teleoperators. touch sensing and display,
Significative example is the Mosher’s Handyman, developed at General Electric Co.;
1966: US Navy’s CURV (Cable Controlled Underwater Vehicle), for retrieval of a bomb
from the deep ocean.
1965: first experiments with relevant time-delays (race to the Moon): instability
problems were firstly noticed in force reflection.
Overview on applications
Use of telemanipulators, in the broader sense of the terminology, may be found in a
number of different areas developed since the early 50’s.First examples of these devices
have been designed and realised for operations in radioactive environments and for
human limb prostheses.
At the moment, this technology is applied in a number of different fields:

space,
underwater,
medicine,
hazardous environments,
production,
security,
simulators,
...
Space applications
Robots are used in space for: Main reasons of using robots in space are
exploration, high costs of human operators,
scientific experiments, hostile environment for human beings.
commercial activities.
At the moment, most part of the teleoperation in space is performed in activities related
to shuttles (problems are well defined and the environment is structured).
Usually, the operator performs a direct control of the task executed by the manipulator.
Main directions of current research activity are the development of:

arms for intra-vehicular and extra-vehicular activities (ESA, NASA, ...),
free flying platforms,
planetary rovers.
The Canadian Remote Manipulator System - RMS
The arm installed on the US space-shuttle, the Canadian Remote Manipulator System
(RMS), is probably the most known example of space telemanipulator:
built by the Canadian firm MD robotics
6 dof arm
20 meter long flexible structure
able of executing pre-programmed and/or teleoperated tasks
resolved rate control
Rotex
ROTEX is a robotic arm for intra-vehicular activities developed by DLR, Germany.
It was successfully used in the mission of the space-shuttle COLUMBIA in 1993,
performing three significant tasks: assembly of a grid, connection/disconnection of an
electrical plug, grasp of a flying object.
Main features:

6 dof, light structure

advanced materials

complex sensorial system:

two 6-axis force/torque sensors,

tactile arrays,

an array of 9 laser rang-finders,

a pair of tiny video-cameras for a stereo image

of the grasping area.

a rather sophisticated man-machine interface

exploiting 3D stereo computer graphics, voice
imput/oputput, stereo imaging

predictive control

the master system is the “DLR control-ball” (6-axis

force sensor)
Space rovers
A successful space telerobotic program has been the Mars Viking Program, which
performed scientific experiments on the Martian surface.
The rover Sojourner is probably the most known space rover, after the succesfull NASA
mission Pathfinder on Mars (July 4, 1997).
Space rovers
Current technology would allow further substantial developments, which are slowed
down by the large amount of money and time required to guarantee a successful
mission.
For these reasons the research are in general jointly developed by national space
agencies, industries and research laboratories.
Relevant technical problems still exist due to:

reliability requirements,
weight constraints,
hostile environments
communication time-delays
(from 1 second in earth orbits to 4-40 minutes for planetary missions).
Underwater
1966: first successful military applications of underwater telemanipulators; the U.S.
Navy’s CURV was successfully employed to retrieve a nuclear bomb from the
ocean.
Underwater
80’s: extensive use of ROVs (Remote Operated Vehicles) for offshore operations for
oil/gas industry.
At the moment, underwater telerobotics is mainly used for business, military missions
and scientific expeditions.
Underwater
Use:
The main users of telesubmersibles are the communications (telephone) and oil
industries, where under water pipes and cables require routine operations.
The scientific community uses this technology for marine biological, geological, and
archaeological missions.
The military have used telerobotics in many salvage operations, such as plane or
watercraft recovery.
However, the most important users are probably in the business field, where it is more
economical to send teleoperated devices rather than human divers.
Technical problems due to conditions of the water environment:
high pressures
hydraulic actuators
poor visibility
External lighting, sonar, ...
communication difficulties
radio, cables, (both), ...
Underwater
Control aspects:
first examples of underwater teleoperation were mainly based on manned
submersibles, either free swimming or connected to a surface ship, and with
teleoperated arms on the outer structure;
telerobotics (autonomous) tasks are usually limited to small routine tasks rather
than complete activities, for example simple tool switching operations, repetitive
bolt/nut screwing, piloting to new locations;
in more recent operations, human operators remotely control the submersibles;
computer graphic simulation may help the user during task execution in partially
known environments.
Medicine (Telesurgery)
Main applications of robotic manipulators in the medical field:
help to impaired people,

surgery operations,
diagnose illnesses or injuries,
training of specialised personnel.
Robotic systems of different complexities have been

developed since the 50’s for helping impaired people.
Among the most common systems are automated

wheelchairs, controlled by voice or by joysticks for
hands, mouth, eye or head movements.
At the moment, there is a relevant interest in applying teleo-

perated devices in microsurgery operations, e.g. eye surgery,
where small precise movements are needed.
The movements of the operator are scaled down by the

mechanism so that very fine operations can be performed
while maintaining a suitable telepresence effect.
Another important class of surgical process consists of the so

called “minimally invasive” procedures.
In this case, the surgeon operates through small insertions
using thin medical instruments and small video cameras.
The increased difficulties for the surgeon are partially com-

pensated by computers, which are used to create virtual envi-
ronments where the use of telepresence plays a fundamental
role.
Telediagnosis may also broaden the

range of a single doctor by allowing
to exam a patient visually or viewing
records on a computer interface.
Telemanipulation may be used in surgery operations for

remote surgery (militar, ...)

improving performances for operation presenting spatial problems for a surgeon (better and less destructive
results)

improving reach, manipulation, sight and insight on the patient body

Finally, telepresence is becoming very important for the instruction of specialised doctors and for performing
rehearsals before the actual operation.
Telerobotics in hazardous environments
Nuclear industry was the first important user of modern teleoperating devices.
Telerobotics is applied in hazardous environments (nuclear, chemical, military

applications) for a variety of tasks:
direct handling of radioactive or chemical material,
waste cleanup/disposal
plant inspection
ammunition disposal
...
Telerobotics in hazardous environments

The scenario ranges from very specialised machines (e.g. handling nuclear or chemical
material) which usually only require human supervision to fully teleoperated devices (in
cleanup operations where the environment is usually less structured).
Reliability is one of the main requirements, since equipment must typically operate
in contaminated/dangerous areas for long periods of time.
Significant technological problems are encountered due to radiations and high
temperatures.
Telerobotics in mining and other industries
Besides the typical use of robots in a number of industrial applications (assembly,
welding, painting, and so on), other applications of robotic systems in ‘non-conventional’
production processes have been developed, for example in:
mines,
constructions,
agriculture,
warehousing,
security,
...
Other applications of telerobotics

Augmented reality and stereo vision.

Augmented reality means to enhance the data given to the operator, trying to provide him/her with more
complete and general information of those obtainable directly.
Besides the visual data that can be normally observed, these information also include any form of data that
increases the user perception of the environment, including pre-processing of the video scenes, use of active
and/or stereo vision, graphical images, and virtual tools.

Security.
Applications in this area aim to employ telerobotic devices for the protection of persons and properties. Most
systems used in this area are teleoperated devices since these tasks require decision capabilities and
intelligence levels not possible for machines at the present time.
In the area of security, robots may be used for patrolling buildings (e.g. offices and factories) and for protection
purposes.
Also militars adopt teleoperation, mainly for locating enemies or dangerous equipment without direct risk for
human personnel.

Training and simulators in telerobotics.

Some industries have been using this technology for many years. Perhaps, the most popular examples are the
flight simulators, used to train pilots.
The goals are to give to human operators expertise about complex activities, in reduced time, with lower costs
and minor risk of injury.
Passivity Theory
Claudio Melchiorri

– p.37/139
Passivity Theory
Passivity:
represents a powerful and elegant tool for the analysis and control design for both
linear and non linear dynamic systems;
is a mathematical description of the physical concepts of power and energy;
is very closely related to the stability theory (Lyapunov, energy functions);
allows the design of control strategies for the interaction with arbitrary passive
environments without too concern on modelling and estimation;
human operators can easily deal with passive systems;
transient phases are not well described.
Passivity: some definitions
Let us introduce the following notations:
, a subset of IR (in general the time domain);
, a vector space with the usual Euclidean norm (usually IR );
, the set of all functions mapping in :
, with the properties of
a linear space;
and the causal truncation operator (defined in the case of infinite time functions)

Telem-Pass - Claudio Melchiorri – p.39/139

Moreover, let us consider:
1. the normed linear subspace,
, of the linear space (the Hilbert space of the
functions measurable in the Lebesgue sense):

! "

#

2. the extended space $ associated to :
$

$ is the space of functions whose causal truncation belongs to .

Moreover:
$ , the map
is monotonically increasing,
, the map
as
# .
Consider a dynamic system described in the space state as

(1)

where $ $ $ . Assume the functions

smooth in , with .


A function , called SUPPLY RATE, of the input and of the output is

defined as

The function is assumed to be locally integrable, i.e.

# ! IR

In the following, this function is assumed of the form


$
Definition: The system (1) is said to be PASSIVE if there exists a continuous function,
called storage function,
IR , which satisfies ,

such that

(2)

$
Definition: The system (1) is said to be STRICTLY PASSIVE if there exists a continuous
(storage) function, IR , which satisfies , and a
$

positive definite function, called dissipation rate, IR

such that

(3)


The definition of passivity given in eq. (2) is often reported in the literature in the

differential form as

or, by explicitly introducing the dissipation rate function , as

(4)
which reflects the concept of the conservation of energy of a physical system.

As previously mentioned, passivity and Lyapunov stability are closely related concepts.
In fact, the following result holds.
Lemma Let suppose the system (1) be (strictly) passive. If the storage function is

positive definite, radially unbounded, and decrescent, then, for , the equilibrium

of (1) is globally uniformly (asymptotically) stable.

Passivity: some useful properties
1. The passivity formalism may be easily applied to the analysis of stability properties
of composed systems.
For example:
a combination of passive subsystems is passive,
if at least one subsystem is dissipative, then the overall combination is
asymptotically stable.
2. If a system with input and output
is passive, then a linear transformation

given by a mapping yields a passive system.

).
3. More in general, the passivity of a system is not changed by a transformation
expressed by an orthogonal matrix (i.e. a matrix such that
Passivity concepts have been widely used in robotics:

to study the stability properties of robots interacting with unknown environments,
for the robustness analysis of force control schemes,
for the development of haptic devices,
for the design of telemanipulation control systems.
Modelling Aspects
Claudio Melchiorri

Modelling a teleoperation system
Network analogy: bilateral teleoperation systems can be viewed as a cascade
interconnection of two-port (master, communication channel and slave) and one-port
(operator and environment) blocks.

By means of the mechanical/electrical analogy and of network theory, the teleoperation

system is described as interconnection of one and two-port electrical elements.

Telem-Model - Claudio Melchiorri – p.47/139

Linear Time-Invariant (LTI) continous systems can be described by the relationships
between the effort and flow variables:
effort variable flow variable
mechanical system force/torque applied to the system linear/angular velocity of the system
electrical system voltage across the terminals current through the network
The analogy is based on similarities between the following variables of mechanical and
electrical systems:
Electrical
Mechanical
Voltage

Force

Current Velocity

Resistance
Viscous friction
Inductance Inertia
Capacitance !
"
# Stiffness

$
"
#
%

&
Series/parallel of previous
One-port impedance '

$
'

elements

Complex mechanical systems can be described by means of elementary mechanical
elements (both passive and active):
Inertia

Viscous friction

Stiffness
Two important elements

1. Two-port ideal transformer: it models a gear reduction with gain , and relates
forces and velocities as:

2. Two-port lossless transmission line: the input/output relationship in the

frequency domain is given by:
tanh sech

sech tanh

where is the length of the line,

, and
( and
characteristic inductance and capacitance of the line)
Two important elements

Ideal transformer

Lossless transmission line

Example of a teleoperation model

Let consider the following master/slave teleoperation device:

$

&

$

&

$

$

&

and the “traditional” force reflection:

$

Example of a teleoperation model
With

, the device is described by the network:

With

, a generator should be included:

Teleoperation system description

Each two-port element and the overall teleoperation system:

"

can be described in terms of:

&

&

&

For LTI systems the operators

are transfer matrices.
Teleoperation system description
The most convenient description can be chosen considering:
distinction between independent and dependent variables,

generality of the description,
stability analysis,
performance evaluation criteria (hybrid matrix).
Impedance matrix

"

Considering a LTI two-port element, it is possible to introduce the impedance matrix

which relates effort ( ) and flow ( ) variables as:

Considering the master/slave system as a connection of consecutive two-port elements,

the impedance matrix of the overall system is given by:

Impedance matrix

With respect to the block structure of the impedance matrix
, two particular cases

are of interest:
Bilateral Teleoperation: the impedance matrix (the teleoperator) is defined bilateral

when both the off-diagonal blocks of ,
and
, are not null:

Reciprocal Teleoperation: the impedance matrix (the teleoperator) is defined

reciprocal when the off-diagonal blocks of ,
and
, are equal:

Hybrid matrix
The impedance decription is not general since it cannot describe particular two-port
elements, i.e. the ideal transformer. A more general description for teleoperation
systems is given by the hybrid matrix, defined according to the following sign convention:

$ $

where:

!!

!

!

Hybrid matrix
Physical meaning of the hybrid matrix elements:
force ratio

!

velocity ratio

and

: input and output teleoperator impedances.
IDEAL HYBRID MATRIX. In case of ideal telepresence, forces and velocities of master
and slave are equal, and therefore:

$

Hybrid vs Impedance
Assuming impedances at the master and slave sites described by the matrices,

and

:

the impedance transmitted to the operator can be computed as a function of the hybrid
matrix.
In the 1 dof case, for example, the following relationship between actual and transmitted
impedance is obtained:

!!

! !

Hybrid vs Impedance
The possibility of exploiting the relation between master and slave impedance matrices
consists in:
introduction of a scaling factor (position and/or force),

use of environment model for deriving impedances functions to be used within the
control loop as real-time simulation of the task (impedance shaping).
The exploitation of the impedance relationships results in overcoming the transparency

design goal and it is essential in several fields, i.e.:
different position scale devices (macro-micro manipulation),

simulator devices,
haptic interfaces.
Wave variables
Let consider the total power flow in a two-port element as composed of two terms, the
input power and output power :

S

!

where

! !

S

! !

Wave variables
With

input wave output wave
Wave variables can be applied both to linear and non-linear systems.
From physical intuition, in stable system the “amplitude” of is less than the
“amplitute” of :

i.e. the “gain” of the system is less than one.

In the definition of wave variables, time-delay is not considered: time-delay does not
affect the “amplitude” of the wave.
Different I/O properties may be achieved introducing passive elements.
Scattering matrix
The Scattering operator (or matrix) relates the input/output wave variables, and , at

each port of the teleoperator instead of the power variables, and .
Definition. Given an -port system, the scattering matrix (or scattering operator) is
defined as the operator which relates input and output wave variables as:

for LTI system:

Scattering and hybrid representation are related by the equation:

!

Scattering vs Passivity
Theorem. An LTI -port element with scattering matrix
is passive if and only if

Corollary. An LTI n-port element described by the scattering matrix is passive if

and only if

! "

where is the maximum eigenvalue and the transpose conjugate

.

of

Scattering vs Passivity
Considerations.
Connection of passive -port preserves passivity.

In traditional force reflection teleoperation systems time-delay instabilities are
originated by the non-passive features of the communication line (local controllers
assuming to stabilize the respective subsystems).
The use of a particular communication channel based on the analogous of a
lossless transmission line results in a passive communication channel (Passivity
Based Teleoperation).
Control Aspects
Claudio Melchiorri

– p.67/139
Control strategies for telemanipulation systems

Operator Master Comm. line Slave Environ.

There are particular features unique to telemanipulation systems:
Unstructured environment;
Presence of a human operator for high-level control:
man/machine interface;
training of specialized personnel;
In general, two distinct and different robotic systems (master & slave):
different kinematics;
different work space;
different impedance characteristics;
different dynamics properties;
Transmission of signals to remote sites (master slave):
choice of suitable signals (position, force, vision, temperature, . . . );
choice and computation of the “coordination” signal;
Time delays (limited bandwith and/or remote location):
instability problems if signals are fed back to master site.
About the control:
“local” (master & slave) controllers are assumed;

the attention is focused mainly in the overall control loop:
operator
master
communication
slave
environment
in particular, the transmission modalities of the relevant signals (velocities/forces/...)
are of primary importance.
Telem-Contr - Claudio Melchiorri – p.69/139

Several control schemes for telemanipulators have been developed. Among the most
known, one can mention:
Unilateral rate control:

direct
resolved
Unilateral position control:
direct
resolved
DIRECT Master Slave
RESOLVED Master Comp. Slave

Bilateral position control:
direct
resolved
DIRECT Master
Slave
RESOLVED Master
Comp.
Slave
Operator aiding control:

filtering
scaling
referencing
motion constraints or compensation
simulation
Unilateral rate control

Direct rate control:

Master Slave
The controller output is relayed directly to the slave servos, where is it interpreted as a VELOCITY command.

Usually, there is an one-to-one correspondence between master’s and slave’s dof.

Commanded velocities can be either preset or continuosly variable.
Some considerations:
+ Simple implementation;
+ Small master motion can cover large worskpaces accurately;
+ Accuracy does not depend on joint resolution;

- Operator experiments coordination difficulties;
- Not compatible in general with force feedback;
- Necessity of visual information on slave location (or mental integration).
Unilateral rate control
Resolved rate control:

Comp.

Master Slave
The controller output is interpreted as a VELOCITY command by the slave servos, after being properly
elaborated by the control system (typically: change of reference frame).


Commanded velocities can be either preset or continuosly variable.
+ Allows change of reference frames;
+ Different control gains;
+ Small master motion can cover large worskpaces accurately;
+ Accuracy does not depend on joint resolution;
+ Much simpler use for the operator;

- Moderate/high computational burden;
- Not compatible in general with force feedback;
- Necessity of visual information on slave location (or mental integration).
– p.73/139
Telem-Contr - Claudio Melchiorri
Unilateral position control

Direct unilateral position control:

Master Slave
The controller output is relayed directly to the slave servos, and is interpreted as a DESIRED JOINT MOTION
command.

+ Control input corresponds to desired slave’s servos position;

- High resolution position sensors on both master and slave;
- Spatial correspondence depends on master and slave configuration;
- No force feedback: the operator input can exceed tha maximum slave velocity;
- Control frame of the end-effector connot be specified;
- Limited use of scaling.
Unilateral position control
Resolved unilateral position control:

Comp.

Master Slave
The controller output is interpreted as a DESIRED JOINT MOTION command by the slave servos, expressed in
a convenient reference frame attached to the slave (end-effector, ...).

Elaborations performed by the control systems.

+ Choice of reference frame;
+ Spatial correspondence does not depend on master and slave configuration;
+ Scaling can be easily incorporated;

- No force feedback: the operator input can exceed tha maximum slave velocity;
- Since the configuration of master and slave may differ, configuration feedback may not be available.
Bilateral position control

Direct bilateral position control:
Master
Slave
The controller output is relayed directly to the slave servos, and is interpreted as a DESIRED JOINT MOTION
command.

Simultaneously, the slave position is sent back to the master controller, where it is interpreted as a REQUIRED
JOINT POSITION.

The result is the generation of a force at both the master and slave site when their positions is different.
+ Force feedback;
+ Control input corresponds to desired slave’s servos position;

- Increased controller complexity (wrt unilateral position control);
- Spatial correspondence depends on master and slave configuration;
- Control frame of the end-effector connot be specified;
Bilateral position control
Resolved bilateral position control:
Master
Comp.
Slave
Master joint signals are transformed into equivalent Cartesian movements of the slave reference point, and then
transformed in servo joint commands;

Similarly, the slave position is transformed and sent back to the master controller.

When the positions of master and slave are different, there is force reflection at the master and force generation
at the slave site.
+ Choice of reference frame;
+ Spatial correspondence can be obtained regardless of controller design;
+ Motion and force scaling easily achievable;

- Relevant computational burden;
- Since the configuration of master and slave may differ, configuration feedback may not be available;
- High resolution position sensors on both master and slave.
Operator aiding control

FILTERING: process in which extraneous motions superimposed to the control signal
(by the operator) are detected and eliminated.
Smoothness of inputs; possible phase errors.
SCALING: a “geometric gain” may be used between master and slave motions. Useful
for gross motions and/or precision operations.
RE-REFERENCING (or INDEXING): possibility of having the slave workspace always

mapped in a proper location of master workspace.
CONTROL COORDINATES RE-REFERENCING: possibility of changing the reference

frame in which the motions are expressed (tool, base, and so on).
MOTION CONSTRAINTS: constraints are artificially added to the slave site in order to
protect or improve the control action.
COMPENSATION TECHNIQUES: data to/from the slave are artificially modified in order
to enhance or compensate some (physical) effects, such as dynamics, friction, tracking
of moving objects, and so on.
Bilateral control
Usually, the goals of a telemanipulator are to operate in an unstructured environment,
and therefore the human control is required.
Since the operator represents the main “controller” of the system, he/she requires to be
informed about the evolution of the task and about some pertinent information:
presence of data feedback from the slave to the master;

development of a proper user interface.
Signals fed back to the master may be related to:

forces applied to the environment;
relevant positions of the slave;
graphical video data;
tactile or acoustic information;
...
The choice of the type of signals transmitted to the operator has strong implications on
the control properties and performances of the system.
Bilateral control
COORDINATION SIGNAL(s): The

signal(s) transmitted back to the
operator.
The term ‘coordination’ is used to indicate a signal computed as a function of the master
and slave variables, in order to obtain their reciprocal tracking.
Usually:

The operator specifies a desired velocity ( ) to the environment through the

master, the communication channel and the slave,

The operator receives back a force signal (
).
Bilaterally controlled teleoperator: when the flow of the signals can be reversed, i.e. the
operator may assign a force and receives back a velocity information.
This is equivalent to reversing the roles of the master and the slave.
Possible control design goals
In designing the overall control systems, some goals can be considered:
Telepresence;
Telefunctioning:
Power scaling;
Impedance scaling;
Impedance shaping.

Telepresence
Main goal of the control system is to have, in steady state, the slave velocity equal to the
master velocity, i.e.

and similarly for the forces

In this case, the teleoperator is defined transparent.

Telefunctioning
This is a more general approach than telepresence. In this case, requirements for the
control system are


Examples of telefunctioning:
teleoperation systems in which the operator experiences scaled-down values of the
forces at the slave side,
teleoperation system with scaled-down position (velocities) as in microsurgery
applications,
the human operator while maneuvering a rigid body should feel forces as he was
maneuvering a light single-point mass.
In these examples, one relashionship between master/slave variables is specified. More

in general, three independent relationships can be assigned between the four variables:

impedance

A possible set of relationships between velocities

and forces

is:

In general, there are four relations between velocities/forces, but only three can be
independently assigned.

' '

Telepresence can be considered a subclass of telefunctioning:

.
Telepresence realizes a dynamic similarity between master/slave variables.

Power and impedance scaling devices

At the moment, there is a noticeable attention for master/slave teleoperation systems

under different conditions of:
dimensions, forces, power.
In particular, two possible classes of these devices are:

strength-increasing devices: human power amplification,
dexterity-increasing devices: increasing of the dexterity performances
(Macro-Micro Bilateral Manipulators, MMBM).
The ability of the operator in manipulating the object is increased in terms of power or
dexterity.
Within the class of Power Scaling Devices:

“MAN-AMPLIFIERS” (’60): coordination of several devices in order to obtain the
required power level,
“ACTIVE PROSTHESIS” (’60): greater extent of power respect to prosthesis muscle
activated,
“EXTENDERS” and “EXTENDED PHYSIOLOGICAL PROPRIOCEPTION” (EPP)
(’80): excessive fatigue experienced by the operator while operating man-amplifiers
and active prosthesis.

These devices result in particular generalized power amplifiers:

operational amplifiers are information flow processors and result in unilateral elaboration (ideal input/output
impedances),

power scaling devices are power flow processing elements and result in bilateral elaboration (power couplings
between the elements, non-ideal input/output impedances).
Ideal power scaling device:

velocity scaling factor,

force scaling factor,

'

operator admittance function,
environment impedance function

'

'
$

$

.
From
!

$ $

the power contributions at the two ports of the device are related by:

The coefficient "

is the power factor of the telemanipulation system.
Moreover, the apparent impedance transmitted to the operator results:

$
The impedance factor of the bilateral system is given by .
Two relations with two scaling factors:

$
By defining a proper selection of the velocity/force scaling factors, it is possible to
independently obtain certain values of the power and impedance factors:
scaling the power;
scaling the impedance.
Force scale factor

In order to have a unitary impedance factor, given a position/velocity factor ,
should be the inverse of the position scale factor:

Therefore, the apparent impedance

transmitted to the operator equals the
impedance
:

Nevertheless, it is possible (and sometimes desirable) to adjust the transmitted

impedance by varying and :
!:

the apparent impedance is magnified;

!:

the apparent impedance is unscaled;

!:

the apparent impedance is scaled down.

Force scale factor
Similarly, since the power gain of the teleoperation device is:

$
then
$
defines the locus of unity power gain (passivity).

Power Impedance
Attenuation Magnification
Moreover:

:

$
power is attenuated from the operator to the task;
!

$

: $

power is the same at both sides;

:
Impedance
Power
power is amplified from the operator to the task. Minification Amplification

! !

Impedance shaping telemanipulation

Impedance Shaping Telemanipulation:

alternative approach to the transparency methodology,

evolution of the power and impedance scaling methodology,

a priori knowledge of an environment model,

a real-time simulation of a “virtual environment” is used (with the model of the environment) for obtaining the
apparent impedance.
In general, it is possible to obtain geometric, kinematic and dynamic similarities:

Geometric similarity: the ratios between all geometric dimensions of master/slave subsystems are equal.

Kinematic similarity: equality of all geometric dimension ratios and time scaling.

Dynamic similarity: equality of all geometric dimensional ratios, time scaling and force ratios.

An example
Consider a bilateral macro/micro teleoperator with position scaling factor
!

$
The environment is a mechanical system of mass and viscous friction
.
Two possibilities for the choice of the force scaling factor:
originates an impedance factor

$ $
the apparent impedance is a mass component,
originates an impedance factor

$ $
the apparent impedance is a viscous friction.

Environment model '

$

Kinematic similar impedance '

$

Virtual environment '

$

Apparent impedance

transmitted to the operator

' ! '

'

'

Control Schemes
Claudio Melchiorri

Some control schemes
Some general considerations:
1. in telemanipulation, a relevant control problem is given by the time-delay introduced

by the communication channel (more than robots control or slave/environment
interaction features);
2. presence of time-delay has to be considered for the stability problems;
3. force feedback to the operator and local compliance control at the slave site have to
be designed for avoiding excessive contact forces;
4. telemanipulation systems where only position information are transmitted between
master and slave result in very stiff devices with poor performances;
5. in reliable teleoperation a coordination signal (force reflection) is required;
6. direct reflection of the force signal can result in unstable systems.

Some well known bilateral teleoperation systems:
1. “Traditional” force relection teleoperation (TFR);

2. “Shared Compliance Control” teleoperation (SCC);
3. Passivity-Based teleoperation;
4. Predictive control.
These control schemes are investigated considering:
1. Presence of time-delays. The control schemes will be described and their features
in the presence of time-delays discussed.
2. Scattering theory. The scattering analysis will be adopted in order to investigate
the passivity properties of the control methodologies (hybrid and scattering
matrices).
3. Communication line. The control schemes are mainly based on different
methodologies for the computation of the coordination signal, without dealing with
the local controllers.
The analysis considers the communication line properties as a key factor for a
suitable definition of the coordination in presence of time-delays.
4. Limitations. In the following analysis, the human operator and the environment
model are not considered.
5. Experimental activity. A simple 1 dof teleoperation device (two one-dof “robots”
position and force sensorized) is used for implementing the different control
methodologies.
Traditional force reflection

Consider the master/slave systems connected by the simple

communication “law”:

$

where is the time-delay due to the communication network.
Considerations:
even in presence of small time-delay (limited bandwidth) instabilities appear;

the insertion of a force reflection gain

! , i.e.

$
!

reduces the performances without producing a valuable improvement of the stability properties;

the communication channel does not result passive, and this originates instability;

the non-passive communication channel introduces power contributions in the overall system.
These contributions have to be compensated by introducing attenuation in the local controllers.
Modelling the TFR
Given:
1. the master dynamics and communication variables (local master controller):

2. the slave dynamics, communication variables and slave local controller:

where:
, master/slave masses and damping factors,
human operator model (stiffness),
slave position controller.
Modelling the TFR

From

the following hybrid matrix is obtained:

By using the hybrid/scattering relationship, the scattering matrix
, computed for

, is

Modelling the TFR
The norm of the scattering matrix for TFR is:

The norm of the scattering matrix results infinite and the passivity conditions are not
verified even for very low time-delays .
In practical applications, stability can be achieved only by inserting attenuation at the
local controllers in order to compensate the power components introduced by the
communication channel.
TFR: scattering analysis

The maximum singular value of the scattering matrix,

, of TFR teleoperators is reported in the figure:

as a function of
,

for different values of the force reflection gain

.
2
10
s_max(S(jw))

$

(dashed),
1

$
(dotted),
10

$

(solid),

$

(dashdot).
0
10
−2 −1 0 1
10 10 10 10
w*T [rad]
TFR: scattering analysis
2
10
s_max(S(jw))
1
10
0
10
−2 −1 0 1
10 10 10 10
w*T [rad]

, i.e. the system is not passive
.
The norm of the scattering matrix is unbounded for

, bounded for
.

The non-passivity features of the TFR do not change by reducing the force
reflection gain.
TFR Verification

Repetitive operator actions (force impulses) on the master,

without interaction at the slave site,

time-delays programmed to:

−3
(a) forcem/s [N] (c) fmd−fs [N*m]
x 10
2 4
0 2
−2 0
−4 −2
0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5
(b) xm−xs [rad] −3 (d) tm−ts [N*m]
x 10
0.4 5
0.2 0
0 −5
0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5
Time [s] Time [s]
(a) operator/environment forces (c) master/slave forces

(b) master/slave positions (d) master/slave torques
TFR Verification


without interaction at the slave site,

time-delays programmed to:

(a) forcem/s [N]
2 (c) fmd−fs [N*m]
0.01
0
0
−2
−4
0 1 2 3 4 5 −0.01
0 1 2 3 4 5
(b) xm−xs [rad]
(d) tm−ts [N*m]
1 0.01
0.5 0
0 −0.01
0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5
Time [s] Time [s]

Shared Compliance Control (SCC)

Shared Compliance Control deals with:
interaction of the slave with the environment;
the time-delay problems.
Two basic features:
the particular coordination signal;
sharing the teleoperated capability with some degree of slave autonomy.
Coordination signal: based on the Position-Error Based Force Reflection

It is proportional to the error of the actual master posture and the delayed slave one,
through the force reflection gain .


The force reflection can be originated by:

1. interaction at the slave site,
2. time-delays.
Note that the coordination strategy introduces a compliance between the robot positions.
Shared control: an autonomous compliance controller is realized at the slave site.

Shared compliance is a key-factor for overcoming instabilities due to time-delays.

Overall control scheme:

Low-pass filter

#
-

+

+
# #

-

+ -

master dynamics !
"

#
slave dynamics !
"

force reflection gain
shared compliance controller
environment model #
Force measurements are used at the slave site (compliance controller).

Position errors for deriving the coordination signal.

SCC: Stability Analysis
The time-domain description of the network is:

In order to apply the network theory and compute the hybrid matrix, we consider the
following scheme:

+

-

The impedance is introduced in order to represent the slave variables as power

factors
and
, thus allowing the hybrid representation.


If an unitary value for is considered, the system is described by:

and the scattering matrix is:

The maximum singular value, , of the scattering matrix of SCC is

reported in the figure:

for different values,

for
.
1
10
(dashed),
s_max[S(j w)]

$

$

(dashdot),

$

(solid),

$

(dotted).
0
10
−2 −1 0 1
10 10 10 10
w [rad/s]

1
10
s_max[S(j w)]
0
10
−2 −1 0 1
10 10 10 10
w [rad/s]
SCC is not passive for any value of

and for any ;

Even if at low frequency

, local controllers have to be considered for attenuation of

!
energy contributions of the communication network.
In any case, stability may be achieved depending on:
the time-delay;

;

proper local controllers.
It results that higher (TFR) values of

can be imposed for a given .
SCC - Experimental Verification


force reflection gain approximately equal to TFR.
$

!
−3 (c) fmd−fs [N*m]

(a) forcem/s [N] x 10
5
5
0
0
−5
−10 −5
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
−3 (d) tm−ts [N*m]
(b) xm−xs [rad] x 10
1 5
0.5 0
0 −5
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Time [s] Time [s]
SCC - Experimental Verification

force reflection gain approximately equal to TFR.
$

(a) forcem/s [N] (c) forcem/s [N]

5 10
0
0
−10
−5 −20
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
(b) xm−xs [rad] (d) xm−xs [rad]
0.5 1.5
1
0
0.5
−0.5 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Time [s] Time [s]

For a given time-delay, the force reflection gain

can be larger than in the TFR scheme.

For larger time-delays the force reflection gain should be accordingly reduced to guarantee stability.
SCC and phase-lag controller
In SCC teleoperation for a given time-delay a proper limitation of the force reflection
gain should be introduced.

For large time-delys the maximum

assuring stability is noticeably reduced.
In order to increase the maximum value it is possible to introduce the following

control law in the feedback flow of the teleoperator, in place of the gain:

The zero ( ) and the pole ( ) of the phase-lag network design can be based on

frequency techniques (Michailov hodographs, Domain subdivision).
SCC and phase-lag controller

Experimental comparison between the original SCC scheme and the phase-lag scheme is shown.
Approximately equal steady-state force reflection,

similar initial operator force action on master, (in both cases time-delay $

).
SCC scheme and

SCC scheme
phase-lag network
(c) forcem/s [N]
(a) forcem/s [N]
5
5
0 0
−5 −5
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
(b) xm−xs [rad] (d) xm−xs [rad]
0.5
0.2
0
−0.5 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Time [s] Time [s]
(a) operator/environment forces (c) operator/environment forces
(b) master/slave positions (d) master/slave positions
Passive Control
Claudio Melchiorri

– p.117/139
Passivity based teleoperation

Instabilities in time-delay teleoperation is produced by the non-passive features of the
communication network (i.e. traditional force reflection).
Goal of passivity-based teleoperation is to obtain passivity for the communication
network

stability time-delay
The communication channel is designed on the basis of the lossless transmission line
and the electro-mechanical analogy.
Two control schemes have been introduced (Anderson & Spong, Niemeyer & Slotine)
corresponding to different considered levels of complexity and phenomena:
1. the “lossless transmission line”,

2. the “passivity-based with impedance adaptation”.
Passivity based teleoperation - Lossless TL
The lossless transmission line is described by the two-port:

sech

sech

resulting in the hybrid matrix:
sech

sech

Telem-PassC - Claudio Melchiorri – p.119/139

The scattering operator

is:

from which the following alternative representation of the lossless transmission is obtained:

In real application a scaling (impedance) should be introduced in the previous equations between velocities and
forces.

Introduction of scaling factors between velocities and forces should be carefully considered in order to maintain
the passivity of the network.

Introduction of scaling without altering the passivity properties is obtained by means of two transformers
(passive two-port elements) at both the master and the slave site.

The two transformers should introduce respectively the scaling factors:
is the Characteristic Impedance of the

master transformer ratio communication network.
A proper selection of is essential in order to exploit
slave transformer ratio !
the performances of the device.

"
The resulting network is:

The introduction of the characteristic impedance of the communication network results in

the re-definition of the wave variables:

!

!

! !

By considering the wave variables in place of the power ones, the alternative description
of the communication network is obtained:


Therefore, the following transmission line is obtained:

Impedance adaptation
Impedance mismatches are present at the extremities of the communication line,
originating Power Reflections at both sites of the teleoperation system.
The non-strict passivity (note that

) of the lossless transmission line

does not introduce dissipation for the possible power reflections, destabilizing the device.
Impedance adaptation at the terminations of the line is possible by means of two

admittance/impedance elements whose values are tuned with the characteristic
impedence of the line :
master termination admittance
slave termination impedance
The time descriptions of the adaptation elements are:

and being the new input variables of the communication line.

The insertion of these elements results in the modification of the stability features of the
network as well as of its description:
!

! !

A scheme representing the two adaptation elements at the terminations of the
communication line is:

Considering the previous power variable description of the network

the following considerations can be drawn:

termination elements introduce not unitary scaling factors in the system equation
(effect not present in the non-adapted network),
power modification in the network results in the presence of a position drift between
master and slave variables when the slave is interacting with the environment, i.e.
when
(or transient phases),

a scheme for the compensation of this effect can be obtained by adding the
following further element at the slave site.

Scattering Analysis
Maximum singular value
teleoperation scheme is given:
of the scattering matrix of passivity based

as a function of ,
for different values of the force reflection gain
.
0
10
s_max[S(j w)]

$

(dashdot),

$

(solid),

$

(dotted).
−1
10
−3 −2 −1 0 1
10 10 10 10 10
w*T [rad]
The system is passive (even if not strictly passive) for any

value.
The introduction of the drift compensation schemes does not alter the passivity of the network.
Experimental Verification
Adapted passivity based teleoperation,
operator action (force pulse) on the master,
time-delay

.
−3 (c) fmd−fs [N*m]

(a) forcem/s [N] x 10
10 4
0 2
−10 0
−20 −2
0 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20
−3 (d) tm−ts [N*m]
(b) xm−xs−xsd [rad] x 10
5
0.2
0
0 −5
0 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20
Time [s] Time [s]
Position Drift
Adapted passivity based teleoperation,
operator action on the master,
interaction with the environment,
position drift between master and slave (no use of drift compensation algorithm),
time-delay

.
(a) forcem/s [N] −3 (c) fmd−fs [N*m]

x 10
2 2
0
1
−2
−4 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5
(b) xm−xs−xsd [rad] −3 (d) tm−ts [N*m]
x 10
2 2
0
1
−2
0 −4
0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5
Time [s] Time [s]
Position Drift
Introduction of the position drift compensation algorithm:
time-delay

.
(a) forcem/s [N]

5 (c) fmd−fs [N*m]
0.05
0
0
−5
0 1 2 3 4 5 −0.05
0 1 2 3 4 5
(b) xm−xs−xsd [rad]
(d) tm−ts [N*m]
2
0.05
1 0
0 −0.05
0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5
Time [s] Time [s]
Predictive Control
PREDICTIVE CONTROL: the task is graphically simulated in real-time, without
time-delay, exploiting a model of the remote environment and of the slave device.
A graphic interpace is used on which the robotic device is superimposed on the real
operating system in the scene of the remote site.
This type of task planning helps when a noticeable time-delay occurs. In fact, when
operators deal with relevant time-delays, usually they operate with a “move and wait”
strategy, specifying small displacements to the remote robot. With predictive control this
is avoided.
On the other hand, the operator has only visual information about the remote
environment and the task execution.
The force information may or may not be transmitted to the operator, and an extensive
use of graphic simulation and telesensor programming is made to help control of the
task execution.
In the ROTEX project, this control approach has been adopted.
By using predictive display, the time required to execute complex tasks is greatly
reduced.
Performances
Claudio Melchiorri

Evaluation criteria for teleoperated systems
Performances of master/slave teleoperation devices depend on:
mechanical structure of the robotic systems,
local controllers,
methodology used for their coordination.
Performance measures of teleoperators can be obtained with respect to several criteria,
related to a number of different definitions proposed in the literature of what an “ideal
telemanipulator” should be, both in the time or frequency domain.
Examples may be:
total task completion time,
time integral of the applied forces or of the norm of the position/force errors,
dexterity measures,
...
In the computation of some of these measures also the dynamics of the local and
remote systems have to be taken into account: usually it is desired to express the
performances of the overall device as perceived by the operator.
This means that the dynamics of the environment must be included. For this reason, a
second-order model is often assumed:
Telem-Perf - Claudio Melchiorri – p.133/139

with proper values of the coefficients , and .
TIME TO COMPLETION:
Given a particular task, the time to completion is defined as the elapsed time from its

start ( ) to its completion

This index has been extensively used to evaluate stereo-vision systems and to asses
workload and task learning.
The computation of this index is quite simple in well defined tasks, such as in laboratory
experiments, while it results more difficult in other circumstances.
With this criterion, a system is “good” if the time it requires for executing a task is the
minimum. A drawback is that this criterion does not provide any information about the
quality of the execution.
OPERATOR SUBJECTIVE ASSESSMENT:
This criterion clearly depends on the personal judgement of the operator, and therefore it
may not be regarded as an absolute index.
However, it has been shown that this criterion may be definitely correlated with other
performance measures, e.g. time to completion, and that it takes into account more
complex information not easily measurable in other manners.
EFFORT-BASED CRITERIA:
Although several indices based on the energy consumption required to execute a
particular task have been proposed, it was found that a simple measure of the average
of the absolute changes in joint displacements per period of measurement is as
informative about the performances of a teleoperator as more complex effort functions.
Assuming a constant period of measure:

&

is the number of periods,

is the displacement of joint in the -th period, and

is a proper weight factor.
A similar index could be defined considering task variables instead of joint variables.

DEXTERITY:
This type of measure is related to the kinematic configuration and to the posture of the
manipulators.
In fact, tasks in the velocity or force domain can be performed with different efficiency
depending on the configuration of the robotic arm. Basically, measures of this type are
extensions to telemanipulators of known manipulability indices for industrial arms, mostly
based on the Jacobian matrix of a given robot.

Examples:
the determinant of , det
;
the minimum singular value ;
the condition number of ,

;
the “manipulability ellipsoids”, and so on.

PERFORMANCE EVALUATION BASED ON THE HYBRID MATRIX
A direct manner to evaluate the performances of a telemanipulation system is to
compare its hybrid matrix to the ideal one .
$
A performance index can be defined as the “distance” between these two matrices:

$

In the computation of the hybrid matrix all the dynamics relating the operator to

the environment (i.e. the master with its controller, the communication line, the slave and
the environment) have to be considered.
If one takes into consideration, for example, only the hybrid matrix of the communication
line, misleading results may be obtained.

PERFORMANCE INDICES:
This criterion is based on the definition of ideal responses of the teleoperation system, in
terms of time-behaviour of positions and forces.
Assuming that an input force

is applied to the master by the operator, three ideal
responses are considered:
ideal response 1: the slave position

follows exactly the master position

(i.e.
) for any dynamics of the manipulated object;

ideal response 2: the slave force

is equal to the master one

(
) for any dynamics of the manipulated object;

ideal response 3: both the slave position and force variables are equal to the
master ones for any dynamics of the manipulated object.
The performance indices are defined according to the ideal responses 1, 2, and 3 as

&

(5)

$
&

where
defines the frequency range of interest, and

and
are the

transfer functions from the input (i.e. the force applied by the operator) to the master position, slave position, master
force and slave force respectively.
A function (for example a first-order filter)

is introduced in the indices

for weighting different
frequencies components.
From the definitions, it is clear that the measures provided by the indices represent distances between slave and
master positions ( ) and forces ( ).

When the system realises the ideal response 1, then .

$
When the system realises the ideal response 2,

. $
For teleoperation systems satisfying the ideal response 3, both

and
are zero.

WA Melchiorri

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

WA Melchiorri

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

WA Melchiorri

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Robotic Telemanipulation:

General Aspects and Control Aspects

DEIS- LAR, Università di Bologna

DEIS- LAR, Università di Bologna

Teleoperations is one of the first fields in robotics to be developed:

applications (nuclear, medicine) are dated back to the late 40’s.

TELEROBOT: advanced form of teleoperator, usually supervisioned by an human

Telem-Intro - Claudio Melchiorri – p.5/139

General description of a telemanipulation system

Operator Master Comm. line Slave Environ.

General description of a telemanipulation system

data feedback from the slave site to the master one,

development of a proper user interface.

forces applied to the environment,

relevant positions of the slave,

graphical video data,

tactile or acoustic information,

Telem-Intro - Claudio Melchiorri – p.9/139

General description of a telemanipulation system

Telem-Intro - Claudio Melchiorri – p.11/139

General description of a telemanipulation system

Anyway, the transmission of force information originates relevant instability problems

Telem-Intro - Claudio Melchiorri – p.13/139

Telem-Intro - Claudio Melchiorri – p.15/139

Telem-Intro - Claudio Melchiorri – p.17/139

At the moment, this technology is applied in a number of different fields:

Telem-Intro - Claudio Melchiorri – p.19/139

Main directions of current research activity are the development of:

Telem-Intro - Claudio Melchiorri – p.21/139

6 dof, light structure

complex sensorial system:

two 6-axis force/torque sensors,

an array of 9 laser rang-finders,

a pair of tiny video-cameras for a stereo image

a rather sophisticated man-machine interface

the master system is the “DLR control-ball” (6-axis

Telem-Intro - Claudio Melchiorri – p.23/139

Relevant technical problems still exist due to:

Telem-Intro - Claudio Melchiorri – p.25/139

Telem-Intro - Claudio Melchiorri – p.27/139

help to impaired people,

Telem-Intro - Claudio Melchiorri – p.29/139

Robotic systems of different complexities have been

Among the most common systems are automated

At the moment, there is a relevant interest in applying teleo-

The movements of the operator are scaled down by the

Another important class of surgical process consists of the so

The increased difficulties for the surgeon are partially com-

Telem-Intro - Claudio Melchiorri – p.31/139

Telediagnosis may also broaden the

Telemanipulation may be used in surgery operations for

remote surgery (militar, ...)

improving reach, manipulation, sight and insight on the patient body

Telerobotics is applied in hazardous environments (nuclear, chemical, military

Telerobotics in hazardous environments

Telem-Intro - Claudio Melchiorri – p.35/139

Other applications of telerobotics

Augmented reality and stereo vision.

Training and simulators in telerobotics.

2. the extended space $ associated to :

$ is the space of functions whose causal truncation belongs to .

where $ $ $ . Assume the functions

The function is assumed to be locally integrable, i.e.

positive definite function, called dissipation rate, IR

or, by explicitly introducing the dissipation rate function , as

where is the length of the line,

For LTI systems the operators

With respect to the block structure of the impedance matrix

, two particular cases

is passive if and only if

Corollary. An LTI n-port element described by the scattering matrix is passive if

where is the maximum eigenvalue and the transpose conjugate