ARTICLE IN PRESS

International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 48 (2008) 427436 www.elsevier.com/locate/ijmactool

Control concept for PKM considering the mechanical coupling between actors
C. Brecher, T. Ostermann, D.A. Friedrich
RWTH Aachen, Steinbachstrasse 53, D-52074 Aachen, Germany Received 3 July 2007; received in revised form 22 August 2007; accepted 7 September 2007 Available online 19 September 2007

Abstract In machines with parallel kinematic structures, the actors will interfere with each other depending on the mechanical setup. Thus, movements of one actor will directly cause disturbances on the other actors and position errors at the tool centre point. Within a research project it was shown by simulations and measurements on a hybrid kinematic machine that this interference limits the possible control loop settings. The rst part of this paper discusses the possibility to increase the damping of a parallel kinematic structure, if the transformation of the kinematic coordinate systems is moved into the control loops. If this shift leads to an increased damping in the control loops, it can reduce the inuence of the mechanical coupling. The project results yielded that the transformation in the control loops only has scaling effects and that these effects are different with regard to every specic transformation. Thus, the results are not commonly applicable for machine tools and manufacturing. The second part describes another research approach to increase the damping. The coupling of the actors causes the force of the rst drive to act as a disturbance on the second drive. With the known disturbance and the use of a feed forward control the position error due to the coupling can be reduced by nearly 60%. r 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Machine tools with parallel kinematics; Feed forward control; Position error; Actor coupling

1. Introduction and interference of the actors The machining accuracy and the nished surface quality are, in combination with productivity, the most important aspects for todays manufacturing facilities. To meet these requirements, various methods and approaches have been studied and presented. The development of machines with parallel kinematic structures is one of these approaches [1,2]. One of the main problems of machines with parallel kinematics (PKM) is the coupling of the feed drives at the TCP (tool centre point) platform [3,13]. In PKM machines, the effective directions of the actors enclose an angle a, which differs from the usual 901 in serial kinematics. Depending on the mechanical conguration and the position of the TCP in the workspace of the
Corresponding author. Tel.: +49 241 80 28234; fax: +49 241 80 22293.

E-mail address: d.a.friedrich@wzl.rwth-aachen.de (D.A. Friedrich). 0890-6955/$ - see front matter r 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.ijmachtools.2007.09.002

machine, this will cause interference between the actors. The smaller the angle a, the higher the degree of interference. Fig. 1 shows the simplied structure of a Bipod machine. Apart from the arrangement of the actors there are some other factors that have an inuence on the interference between them: stiffness of the mechanical structure, friction in the guideways and, of course, the type of the drives (electromechanical or direct drives) used for the machine. As a result, each movement of one actor exerts a disturbing force on the other actor(s). While electromechanical drives gain their stiffness mainly from the mechanical elements in the force ow, the stiffness of linear direct drives is a result of their control loop settings [4,5]. As a controller always reacts to a disturbance, it can only correct position errors caused by such an interference. As all movements of all actors are known in the NC controller, it should be possible to

ARTICLE IN PRESS
428 C. Brecher et al. / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 48 (2008) 427436

Nomenclature D damping F1 force of linear drive 1 F2 force of linear drive 2 Fa force of linear drive generally Fdist disturbance force G0AZ feed forward control 1 GAZ feed forward control 2 GSZ disturbance transfer function GR controller transfer function GS1 example system transfer function (1) GS2 example system transfer function (2) I current iA, ia actual current is, ist, itarget target current itotal sum of current k1 spring element of actor 1 k2 spring element of actor 2 KE current measurement system KF force constant of the drive Ki proportional factor of the current controller KL, KV proportional factor of the position controller KM amplifying constant of the motor KP proportional factor of the velocity controller LA inductivity of the motor coil

motor torque MM nact number of revolutions q0act actual velocity (machine coordinates) Q1, q1 name of actor 1 (machine coordinates) q1,act actual position of actor 1 (machine coordinates) q1,target target position of actor 1 (machine coordinates) Q2, q2 name of actor 2 (machine coordinates) q2,act actual position of actor 2 (machine coordinates) q2,targ target position of actor 2 (machine coordinates) qact generally actual position (machine coordinates) qtarget generally target position (machine coordinates) RA, Ra motor resistance TT1 scale factor of transformation Tel time constant for electrical PT1-system Tni time constant for current controller Tnp, Tp time constant for velocity controller uA direct current link voltage vs, target speed x0a actual velocity x00 actual acceleration a xa, xact actual x-position xs, xtarget target x-position yact actual y-position zact actual z-position ztarget target z-position

increase the positioning accuracy of the drives by generating a predictive reaction force in the inuenced actors, which balances the expected disturbance force. The relevance of this problem can be demonstrated easily. To detect the dependence between the actors in a PKM, one actor is given a step function as a target input. The deviation of the other actors in reaction to this step can be measured with a trace function of the NC control.

actors

joints

F1,q1 y k1 k2

F2,q2

m TCP platform

Fig. 1. Kinematic structure of a 2-DOF PKM.

Fig. 2 shows the result of such a test on a given hybrid machine tool [6] in the centre of the workspace. As a reaction to a 0.25 mm step on actuator LEFT, the actuator RIGHT has a peak deviation of about 5.5 mm. The used hybrid kinematic is designed as a bipod structure (see Fig. 1). The drives are linear direct drives in the xy plane plus a serial sleeve drive as z-axis. The actors of the bipod are called LEFT and RIGHT as seen from the viewpoint of the operator. Fig. 3 shows the four exemplary positions with their different properties in the workspace, which were used to achieve the various test results. The angle a between the actors varies from 61 to 111. The disturbance inuence between the actors in the characteristic workspace positions (see Fig. 3) can be demonstrated with a series of tests. To achieve this, the step response and the transfer function for the left actor have been determined in each of these positions in the normal operating mode. Subsequently, the controller settings were optimised, admitting a 20% overshoot for the step response of the velocity controller, while the position controller was set at the stability limit. Afterwards, the tests were repeated while the right actor was clamped. Table 1 compares the optimised controller settings for both cases and illustrates how the disturbance inuence limits the controller settings while both actors are actively controlled. The important conclusion from these test series is that a reduced inuence of the mechanical coupling allows for

ARTICLE IN PRESS
C. Brecher et al. / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 48 (2008) 427436 429

Fig. 2. Cross-coupling between the actors.

increased controller settings which lead to increased accuracy and dynamics. Therefore, the obvious goal is to create a control structure which cancels or at least minimises the coupling between actors. 2. Coupled simulation with Matlab/Simulink and MSC.Adams To analyse the behaviour of the machine and to develop new control structures, the mechanical structure and the control loops were mapped into simulation models. The control loop was emulated in Matlab/Simulink while the mechanical structure was converted into a rigid body model with MSC.Adams. Both models were linked together, resulting in a coupled simulation model. The Simulink model feeds motor forces into the mechanical simulation, and receives actual positions of the mechanical structure in both actuator and Cartesian coordinates. The necessary coordinate transformation was implemented in the programming language C and linked to a DLL that can be called up from Matlab. The implementation supplies forward and backward transformation for positions and backward transformation for velocity signals. In addition, the angle a between the actors (see Fig. 1) is calculated. The transformation routines can be used in Simulink like a normal control element. Fig. 4 pictures the basic structure of this simulation environment. Furthermore, the models feature one special property (for research purposes): all friction inuences in the models

have been neglected, thus amplifying the coupling effects and making the simulations overly sensitive. This was done to enhance the examined disturbance effect and the resulting position error for easier evaluation. All simulations were started in one of the poses shown in Fig. 3 from a motionless state.

3. Verication of the simulation with MBS-models Since common simulations with rigid body models only emulate the rst natural frequency, it was necessary to verify selected simulations with additional exible body models. The calculation effort for exible body models is signicantly higher and, in addition, the models are only valid for one specic position in the workspace with minimal TCP movements. Thus, each separate position requires its own exible body model. Because of this, rigid body models were used for most of the performed simulations and compared to selected exible body simulations. In another project at WZL, exible body models for the shown hybrid kinematic were already developed and validated. These models were used to verify the performed simulations in this project. This is detailed in Refs. [7,8]. The rigid body models do not reconstruct the machine exactly, but for the simulation of the coupling between the actors this difference in behaviour was neglectable.

ARTICLE IN PRESS
430 C. Brecher et al. / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 48 (2008) 427436

LEFT

RIGHT

LEFT

RIGHT

Position A ( -175 / -125 )

Position B ( -300 / -250 ) LEFT RIGHT

LEFT

RIGHT

Y X

Position C ( 0 / -250 )

Position D ( 0 / 0 )

Fig. 3. Top view of different poses of the kinematic and the corresponding Cartesian coordinates.

Table 1 Maximum controller settings at real machine, all scaled (%) Both actors in control Position Position Position Position A B C D KV 167, KV 133, KV 122, KV 100, KP 112 KP 115 KP 100 KP 112 Left actor in control, right actor clamped KV 178, KV 161, KV 145, KV 150, KP 112 KP 115 KP 100 KP 112

4. Cartesian control loops The rst approach of the research project was to increase the damping across the complete workspace as a property of the control structure, by moving the kinematic coordinate transformation into the position control loop.

This leads to a Cartesian position controller. The ensuing model is shown in Fig. 5. Alternatively, the transformation was also moved into the velocity control loop. The control structure then has a Cartesian position and velocity controller. In the following, this will be called completely Cartesian control. The performed simulations and tests yielded that a Cartesian position controller actually decreased the quality of the control. The control structure showed a reduced damping in every position of the workspace (see Fig. 6). This test result is an example of a step of 1 mm in X-direction, showing the intended and actual movements in both Cartesian directions. The left picture shows the response with a standard control structure, while the right results feature a Cartesian control loop.

ARTICLE IN PRESS
C. Brecher et al. / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 48 (2008) 427436 431

Control loop linear direct drive (x-y axis) Control loop linear direct drive (x-y axis)
KF Fa KE qact qact iA R A,T K i ,T el u ni i target Kp,T np A
-

Kv
-

qtarget

Current ctrl. loop

Velocity control loop Position control loop

Control loop electromech. drive (z axis)

KM MM KE nact z y x zact R ,L iA A A uA Ki ,Tni i
-

K p, Tnp
-

i total KL v
-

z target

Current ctrl. loop Velocity control loop Position control loop

Mechanical simulation CACE environment

Fig. 4. Structure of the simulation system. LEFT: MKS model with rigid bodies and RIGHT: control loop simulation.

position controller transformation (NC control) position controller

x target KL

servo amplifier Q 1 velocity controller current controller

Ki Tni

motor 1 force constant

Ra Tel ia KF

. Kp Tnp q 1,targ. ist.

-1

xact.

q1,act.

T
yact. q2,act.

servo amplifier Q 2

motor 2

mechanical structure

ytarget

KL

-1

. q2,targ.

Cartesian coordinates

actor based coordinates

Fig. 5. Structure of the Cartesian control loop.

With the completely Cartesian control the results are different from the Cartesian position loop. For the understanding of these results it is necessary to explain

position controller

velocity controller
Kp Tnp ist.

current controller
Ki Tni Ra Tel ia

force constant
KF

(Q 1 and Q 2)

the kinematic structure in more detail. The bipod kinematic is very stiff in the Y-axis, because the force direction of the drives and the Y-axis are at a very small angle. In the

ARTICLE IN PRESS
432 C. Brecher et al. / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 48 (2008) 427436
actuator based position controller step 1mm, x-axis, Pos A Cartesian position controller - step 1mm, x-axis, Pos A

0 X Position [mm] -0.2 -0.4 -0.6 -0.8 -1 1.48 1.5 1.52 1.54 1.56 1.58 1.6 1.62

X Position [mm]

Step TCP

0 -0.2 -0.4 -0.6 -0.8 -1 1 1.05 1.1 Time [s] 1.15 1.2

Step TCP

1.64

1.25

Time [s]
actuator based position controller - response Y-axis, Cartesian coordinates, Pos A

Cartesian position controller - response Y-axis, Cartesian coordinates, Pos A

Y Position [mm]

0.01 0 -0.01 -0.02 1.48 1.5 1.52 1.54 1.56 1.58 1.6

Y Position [mm]

0.02

Reference TCP

0.02 0.01 0 -0.01 -0.02

Reference TCP

1.62

1.64

1.05

1.1 Time [s]

1.15

1.2

1.25

Time [s]

Fig. 6. Simulative results for Cartesian position controller.

Scaling influence of the transformation

2.8 2.6 2.4 absolute value (TT-1) 2.5 2.2 2 2 1.8 1.6 1 0.4 0.3
x-c oord

1.5

-0.25 -0.2 -0.15 0.2

inat e [m

1.4 1.2

-0.1 0.1
]

-0.05 0 0

y-

coo

a rdin

te [

m]

Fig. 7. Scaling effects for actor q1.

X-axis this angle is larger, so the force from the drive is partly lost in the structure (see Fig. 3). The result is a stiff Y-axis and a more compliant X-axis. By shifting the transformation, scaling effects are created, which affect the damping. The Y-axis loses some damping and the X-axis increases its damping. This was proven in many simulations. In the following these scaling effects are discussed, to see if this result signicantly increases the damping across the complete workspace. The rst step to characterise the scaling effect is to create a factor, which

represents for the scaling in every workspace position. The factor is named TT1: D$TT1 (1)

(Only for completely Cartesian control, D damping.) Fig. 7 shows the extent of the scaling effect for actor q1 across the workspace width in X-direction. It can be seen clearly that the positive scaling varies widely, and in position D, which also imposes the upper limits on the control settings, there is no effect at all. Therefore, it must

ARTICLE IN PRESS
C. Brecher et al. / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 48 (2008) 427436 433

be concluded that the scaling effect is not constant and an additionally nonlinearity. This nonlinear nature of the scaling effect would lead to the necessity of adjusting the control parameters in relation to the TCP position in the workspace. Otherwise, the lowest amplication in position D poses a global limit for the settings and therefore, no improvement is gained. With these results it is not expedient to implement the control method into a real NC-control and thus it was decided to abandon the approach. For the complete reasoning and all results, see Refs. [9,10]. 5. Crossover feed forward control However, using the performed tests and the acquired knowledge about the bipod kinematic, it was possible to generate a new approach. The position error of the drive that was not excited in the tests is caused directly by the other actor. The reason for this is the mechanical

coupling at the TCP platform, as explained in chapter 2. The coupling constitutes a mechanical connection which transmits the power from one actor to the other one. This power transmission can be described for each position and in addition, the disturbance force is exactly proportional to the force which moves the excited actor. The disturbance can be calculated over the target path. The scheme of the coupling is illustrated in Fig. 8. The use of a feed forward control disables the main disturbance before it can inuence the actual output. The precondition to use a feed forward control is to know the disturbance input point and, in addition, the disturbance must be measurable and observable [11,12]. These conditions are fullled in the given control system. Fig. 9 illustrates the structure of the ensuing feed forward control. The ideal input point for the feed forward control (see Fig. 9) is in front of the current controller. But since this point is not accessible in a common NC control unit, the real input point has to be between the position controller and the velocity controller. That change must

position controller

velocity controller

ideal current control loop

force constant

xs

KV=KL

vs

K P,Tnp is

ia

KF

Fa

1/m

..

xa

xa xa

Fdist
disturbance force position controller velocity controller ideal current control loop

Fdist ia KF Fa 1/m

xs

KV=KL

vs

K P,Tnp is

..

xa

xa

xa

Fig. 8. Cross-coupling between the actors.

Z(s)

GSz(s) GAz(s) Z(s)

GAz(s)

W(s)

GR(s) -

GS1(s) GS2(s)

X(s) W(s) = Input X(s) = Output Z(s) = Disturbance

Fig. 9. Structure of feed forward control.

ARTICLE IN PRESS
434 C. Brecher et al. / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 48 (2008) 427436

be considered in the transfer function of the crossover feed forward control. Using the information about the system which can be deducted from Fig. 9, it is easy to calculate the mathematical relations. The transfer function of the system is
X s G 0 s G SZ s G AZ sG S1 sG S2 s W s Z s. 1 G 0 s 1 G 0 s (2)

The stabilisation for the feed forward control is given for the complete workspace, since the disturbance force adheres a scaling factor (with a range of 0.10.4) of the force of the other actor and thus never surpasses the useable force of the drives. The general behaviour is a complete compensation of the disturbance for t-N. 6. Simulation results with crossover feed forward control The coupled simulation structure still is the same as in the beginning, but with the added crossover feed forward control. Fig. 10 shows the augmented structure. The achieved results demonstrate a clear advancement. In Cartesian coordinates, the position error of the second actor can be reduced by 60% and these results are reproducible across the whole workspace. Fig. 11 shows the step response of the TCP with and without crossover feed forward control. In comparison to Fig. 6, the damping is increased, so higher control settings are now possible. As a summary of the analysed effects in this project, Table 2 shows a comparison of the maximums settings of the KV-factor with the different control methods. As a consequence of these results, it was decided to implement the crossover feed forward control as the most promising approach on a Siemens 840D control unit to achieve the practical verication of the simulation results. 7. Implementation and results on the real machine To prove the applicability of the crossover feed forward control, it was included into a Compile-Cycle (ELFE) for the NC control Sinumerik 840D and installed on the machine. All the necessary input values were derived from the machine data, and the measurement values were recorded with the Siemens Servo Trace. Since the Siemens control cannot put a step to the drives (outside the drive tuning tools), the excitation is approximated by a fast motion. After a waiting time, the actor drives back to the rst position. Fig. 12 shows the measurement results of one test, which used the same controller settings and workspace position as the simulation to achieve comparable results. From these signal paths it can be concluded that the Q factor is robust. The reduction of the position error on the real machine reaches 58%. In the variation for the factors of the feed forward control there is a great tolerance region (shown in Fig. 12 with Q 0.25 and 0.35), providing them with a robust adjustment range. The feed forward control reduces the main interference produced by the coupling of the actors. This is displayed by the fact that only this specic interference is compensated but not all the disturbances. The remaining vibrations can be reduced by the possible inuence of additional lters in the drives. In order to concentrate on the effect of the feed forward control all the lters were deactivated while testing. The KV factor is set to match the simulation results achieved before. The maximum settings on the real machine are not available for publication.

With Eq. (2) one can acquire a formula to compensate the disturbance exactly: G AZ s G SZ s . G S1 s (3)

In this structure, an input point in front of the velocity controller is preferable, so the transfer function must be changed to X s G 0 s W s 1 G0 s G SZ s G0AZ sGR sG S1 sGS2 s Z s. 1 G 0 s G SZ s . G R sG S1 s

The feed forward control then is G 0AZ s (5)

The crossover from one actor to the other must be characterised for the simulation and the implementation as well. The disturbance can be approximated with the following function: G SZ s f M ; sK a. (6) The constant K(a) describes the inuence of the angle between the actors. This constant can be approximated as an absolute value across the complete workspace. The function f(M, s) is the coupling of the drives, that can be calculated from the force transformation, using the transposed Jacobian matrix of the system [1]. For this machine, it can also be reduced to a factor, with a negligible resulting error, because the inuence is small compared to the inuence of the angle between the actuators: G SZ s f M ; sK a % Q. (7) The reduction of the crossover to a constant factor is based on the assumption of small angles between the actors in combination with their direct mechanical coupling at the TCP and an idealised current control loop. Using Eq. (3) one can now conclude that G AZ s Q . KF 1 (8)

And with the input point between position controller and velocity controller one can now calculate the crossover transfer function as: G 0AZ s QT n s . K FK R K RT nK Fs (9)

ARTICLE IN PRESS
C. Brecher et al. / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 48 (2008) 427436 435

Control loop, actor A

KF Fa KE q act q act Velocity control loop Position control loop iA RA,Tel u A
-

Ki ,Tni i Kp,T np target

-

Kv
-

qtarget

Control loop, actor B

KF Fa z y x q act q act KE Velocity control loop Position control loop iA RA,T el uA
-

Ki ,Tni i Kp,Tnp target

-

Kv
-

qtarget

Mechanical simulation

Fig. 10. Structure crossover feed forward control.

Fig. 11. Simulated step response and cross-coupling in Cartesian coordinates.

Table 2 Maximum controller settings in the simulation, KV factor, all scaled (%) Standard control Cartesian position control 100 100 80 120 Completely Cartesian control 240 240 200 100 Feed forward control 280 200 200 240

Position Position Position Position

A B C D

120 100 120 100

In comparison to the simulation results (see Fig. 11), the position errors are about 50% smaller with and without the feed forward controller. This difference is caused by the friction in the mechanical system that was neglected in the simulation environment. However, the reduction factor for the disturbance due to the feed forward controller is nearly 60% in both cases. The tests were repeated with the other actor and in the other positions in the workspace (see Fig. 3) with similar

ARTICLE IN PRESS
436 C. Brecher et al. / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 48 (2008) 427436
Step left actor, KV = 40 s-1, KP = 1262 As/m, TP = 10 ms

position actor Q1 [mm]

0.3 0.2 0.1 0 -0.1 0 0.2

Target Actual Q = -0.25 Actual Q = -0.35 Actual Q = 0.0

0.4

0.6

0.8

1 Time [s]

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

x 10-3 position actor Q2 [mm] 1 0 -1 -2 -3 -4 -5 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 Time [s] 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
Target Actual Q = -0.25 Actual Q = -0.35 Actual Q = 0.0

Fig. 12. Measured position error with and without feed forward control.

results, so it can be stated that the simplications made are acceptable. 8. Conclusions Different modications for the control of parallel kinematic machines are discussed in this paper, but in the end only a crossover feed forward control has demonstrated good results to be implemented in a real machine. On the way to this result, a coupled simulation was designed with a mechanical part as a rigid body model and the control structure implemented as Matlab/Simulink model. The simulation models were veried on the appropriate machine. The results conrm the good quality of the simulation models. A crossover feed forward control was implemented as a Compile-Cycle in a Siemens control unit. With its good results it demonstrated that this solution increases the damping and the quality of the control structure. Up to 58% of the interferences between the actors were reduced by the feed forward control. This minimises the deviation in Cartesian coordinates and the errors on the work pieces. Acknowledgement The authors gratefully acknowledge the support of DFG (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, German Research Foundation). References
[1] P. Kru ger, Steuerung und Regelung fu r Maschinen mit ebener Parallelkinematik, Diss., RWTH Aachen, 2004.

[2] C. Brecher, M. Weck, T. Yamasaki, Controller-integrated predictive oscillation compensation for machine tools with parallel kinematics, International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 46 (2) (2006) 142150. [3] J. Berkemer (Herausgeber), EffeNDiEffektive Nutzung des Leistungspotenzials von Direktantrieben bei Werkzeugmaschinen, Abschlussbericht, VDI Fortschrittsberichte, 2006. [4] M. Weck, P. Kru ger, C. Brecher, Statische und dynamische Steigkeit von linearen Direktantrieben, Antriebstechnik 36 (12) (1997) 5763. [5] M. Weck, C. Brecher, Werkzeugmaschinen 3, Mechatronische Systeme-Vorschubantriebe, Prozessdiagnose. 6, Springer, Auage, 2006. [6] D. Prust, High Performance Machining Center VISION, in: Parallel Kinematic Machines in Research and Practice, Conference Proceedings, Chemnitz, 2004, pp. 585589. [7] C. Brecher, K.-D. Broichhausen, H. Flegel, J. Fleischer, D. Friedrich, A. Herrscher, F. Klocke, D. Lung, G. Marczinski, M. Queins, H.-W. Raedt, K. Steffens, P. Wagner, H. Willms, S. Witt, Integrierte Simulation von Prozess, Werkstu ck und Maschine, in: Wettbewerbsfaktor Produktionstechnik-Aachener Perspektiven, Hrsg.: C. Brecher, F. Klocke, R. Schmitt, G. Schuh, AWK Tagungsba nde 2005, Shaker, Verlag, Aachen, 2005, ISBN 3-8322-3988-X, S, pp. 307350. [8] C. Brecher, M. Weck, Y. Altintas, S. Witt, Virtual Machine Tool, CIRP Annals-Manufacturing Technology 54 (2) (2005) 651674. [9] M. Weck, T. Ostermann, D.A. Friedrich, Abschlussbericht zum DFG-Vorhaben Entwicklung eines Fu hrungs- und Regelungskonzepts fu r parallele Kinematiken. [10] C. Brecher, T. Ostermann, D. Friedrich, Antriebskopplung bei PKM-Maschinen-Regelungskonzepte fu r parallelkinematische Maschinen, in: wt Werkstattstechnik online (2006), Heft 7/8S, pp. 519525. [11] M. Gu nther, Kontinuierliche und zeitdiskrete Regelungen, B.G. Teubner, Stuttgart, 1997. [12] O. Fo llinger, Regelungstechnik, vol. 8, Hu thig, Auage, 1994. [13] M. Weck, M. Giesler, Task oriented multi-objective-optimization of parallel-kinematics for machine tools, in: Development Methods and Application Experience of Parallel Kinematics, Conference Proceedings, Chemnitz, 2002, pp. 197211.