Sunteți pe pagina 1din 5

- 1:l Proceedings of the

American Control Conference


Seattle, Warhlnglon *June l9R

A New Neural Network Control Technique for Robot Manipulators *


Seul Jung and T.C. Hsia
Robotics Research Laboratory
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering
University of California, Davis
Davis, CA 95616
e-mail :hsia@ece.ucdavis.edu and j ung Qece.ucdavis .edu

Abstract linear robot dynamic model. Variations of this basic


idea can be found in other designs[4,6,7]. NN can also
A new neural network (NN) control technaque for robot be trained off-line t o model the nonlinear robot dy-
manapulators as antroduced an thzs paper. The fun- namics, and then is used to implement the computed-
damental robot control technaque as the model-based torque controller with further on-line modifications t o
computed-torque control whach is subjected t o perfor- account for uncertainties [6].
mance degradataon due t o model uncertaanty. N N con-
trollers have been traditzonally used t o generate a com- In this paper we investigate a new robot control
pensatang joint torque t o account for the eflects of the technique as depicted in Figure 1. Compensation of
uncertaantaes. The proposed N N control approach as robQt model uncertainty is achieved by modifying the
conceptually diflerent an that at as aamed at prefilter- desired trajectory, q d , using an appropriately trained
ang the desaredjoant trajectoraes before they are used to NN serving as a nonlinear filter. The filtered trajec-
command the computed-torque-controlled robot system tories qr q,. qT are the desired reference inputs t o the
computed-torque robot control system (referred t o as
(the plant) t o counteract performance degradation due
t o plant uncertaantaes. In this framework, the N N con- the plant). The trajectory tracking error E = q d - q is
troller ser2res as the anverse model of the plant, which used as training signal. In this arrangement, the NN
can be traaned on-lane usang 30ant trackang error. Sev- acts as the inverse of the plant. Hence we refer the
eral variataons of thas baszc technaque as antrodaced. proposed technique as neural network inverse control.
Back-propagataon trainang algorithms for the N N con- The control problem posed in Figure 1 is an exam-
troller have been developed. Samulatzon results have ple of the general problem of NN control of nonlin-
demonstrated the excellent tracking performance of the ear plants. For this class of problems, plant dynamics
proposed control technaque. must be known (or a model is identified) to implement
the error-back-propagation algorithms for training the
NN. We also note that the control system of Figure 1
I Introduction can be viewed as an inverse system model identifica-
tion problem El]. Thus a necessary condition by the
For the past several years, there have been a lot of proposed scheme is that the plant be stable.
interests in applying artificial neural networks (NNs) In most practical cases, we can assume that the
to solve the problems of identification and control of
plant based on the nominal robot model is stable when
complex nonlinear system by exploiting the nonlin- it is subjected to all uncertainties encountered in per-
ear mapping abilities of the NN [l, 2, 31. At the forming tasks. Under this condition, the robot track-
same time, extensive investigations have been carried ing error e = 4,. - q satisfies approximately a sec-
out to design NN controllers for robot manipulators ond order linear differential equation. It is this prop-
[4, 5, 61. The fundamental approach for robot ma- erty that allows us t o carry out the required error-
nipulator control is the model-based computed-torque
back-propagation computations. Combining this re-
control scheme. Within this framework, the use of sult with the assumed stability property for the plant
NN controller is basically t o generate auxiliary joint makes the proposed control scheme in Figure 1 feasi-
torques t o compensate for the uncertainties in the non- ble. Several variations of this basic approach is exam-
'This work is supported in part by NITTA Corporation of ined as shown in Figures 2 and 3. In the following,
Japan we will develop the NN controller training algorithm

878
as well as presenting simulation results for on-line tra- I11 Neural Network Inverse
jectory tracking. It is shown that the control scheme
is practical and the control system performance is ex-
Control
cellent. A new robot control scheme is proposed in this pa-
per as depicted in Figure l. The basic concept of this
scheme is that the NN controller acts as the inverse of
I1 Computed-Torque Control the plant(the robot under computed-torque control)
so that the robot response q tracks q d with minimal
The dynamic equation of an n degrees-of-freedom ma- distortion. So when the NN controller is updated on-
nipulator in joint space coordinates is given by : line t o account for the uncertainties in the robot dy-
namics, optimal trajectory tracking by the robot can
be achieved. The tracking errors ( ~ , i ,are )used to
update the NN weights. From Figure 1 (called Scheme
where the vectors q , q , q are the joint angle, joint ve- A) the control input vector ~ ( tis)
locity, and joint acceleration, respectively; D(q) is
the n x n symmetric positive definite inertia matrix; .(t) = qr + IcD(qr - 4) + K P ( q r - 9) (6)
H ( q , q ) = C(q,q)q+G(q);C(q,q ) is the n x 1 vector of
Coriolis and centrifugal torques; G(q)is the n x 1 grav- where q,. 6,. q,. are reference input vectors to the plant
itational torques; T is the n x 1 vector of joint actuator and they are independently generated by the NN (so
torques; F ( 4 ) is an n x 1 vector representing Coulomb they are independent t o one another, i.e.derivative re-
friction and viscous friction forces. Computed-torque lations among them do not necessarily hold). Combin-
method is the basic approach to robot control when ing (1) and (6) yields
nominal robot dynamic model is available. That is,
the control law can be written as (qr-q)+l(o (qr-p)+I(p(qr-q) = a-'(ADq+Ah+.f)
(7)
To analyze how the NN controller works, let us de-
+ 4),
T ( t ) = fi(q)u(t> &I (2) note its three outputs as q h p , d d , and da where q,. =
where a(,) and k(q,q)are estimates of D(q) and 4a, q,. = d d , q,. = dP as shown in Figure 1. Using
-
the definition of tracking error E = q d q , (7) can be
H ( q , q ) , and u ( t ) is given by
rewritten as

+KDg + + i d -k
l<pE =6 + IcDQd Kpqd - (8)
where K p and I(0 are n x n symmetric positive defi- where b = &'(AD4 + Ah + f) and ?Ir, = ($a +
nite gain matrices. Combining ( l ) , ( 2 ) , and (3) yields K ~ ) 4 d + l i p d which
~ ) represents the total contribution
the closed loop dynamic equation of the NN outputs to the tracking error equation (8).
When the NN controller is converged, E = 0 and the
i; + ~~i + K p e = b - l ( ~ ~ (+q AH(^,
) q (r) + ~ ( q ) ) ideal N N outputs 4p (bd da satisfy the relationship
(4)
where AD(q) = D(q) - " ( A H ( q , i ) y H ( q , i ] -
a(q, q), e = (q,. - q ) and qr = q d + d P . If D = D , H =
H , F = 0 and cb = 0, then q,. = q d and equation It is seen that Q A is equal t o a combination of the de-
(4) becomes the following ideal linear second order sired trajectories and robot model uncertainties. This
equation of motion in error space as follows: means that the function of the N N controller is to
modify the desired trajectories such that its outputs
dP d d d a satisfy the relation (9).
In view of the above analysis it is clear that the
where E = q d - q . Since there are always uncertainties NN controller can be redesigned as shown in Figure
in the robot dynamic model, the ideal error response 2 (called Scheme B). In this scheme, the NN outputs
(5) can not be achieved and the performance is de- are added t o the desired trajectories such that q,. =
graded as indicated by (4). Thus the computed-torque ( b a + i d , qr d d + q d , and Qp = dP + q d . Substituting
based control is not robust in practice. To improve ro- q,. q,. q,. into (7) yields
bustness, NN controllers are proposed t o compensate
for the uncertainties as shown in Figures 1 and 2.

a79
where 9~ = [+a + I i ' ~ + d+ K p & ] . Thus, for Scheme plant model which provides simple results to (15). In
B, the ideal output of NN at convergence is view of (14), we have

QB =6 (11)
- -
In this case the N N is only required to cancel out the
robot model uncertainty. Simulations presented later
show that Scheme B is more efficient than Scheme A.
Comparing the new results with those schemes which where
modify the robot joint torques , the N N in Schemes
A and B have higher dimensional output than that
of scheme by Ishiguro et. al [4]. This increased N N
complexity should provide better controller perfor-
mance. Our simulations show that this is true. We
propose to use multilayer feedforward neural network
with back-propagation updating algorithms. (17)
J is a Jacobian for the plant which depends only on
the PD gains. The gradient rule for weight update is
IV Neural Network Controller aE
Design A w J ( ~=) -q - + Q Aw(t - 1) (18)
820
The standard two layer feedforward neural network where 17 is the update rate and 01 is the momentum
is used as the controller. It is composed of an input coefficient.
buffer, a non-linear hidden layer and a linear output
layer.
The weight updating law minimizes the objective
function E ( ) which is a quadratic function of track-
V Simplification for Controller
ing errors E : Design
E ( E ) = I2( C T ) (12)
The control Schemes A an B involve simultaneous gen-
w h e r e E = [ e T iT ET 3 T , ~ = ( q d - q ) , E = ( i d - i ) , a n d eration of the robot reference trajectories qr , 4,., and q,.
= i d - (1. The gradient of E(E) is using three separate tracking errors, E , d , and E . Thus
the total number ofweights is ( n l + l ) n w + ( n ~ + l ) n o .
a q ~ =) -Ea f T
- = -[ aqT -
- aiT 1-aiT E (13)
But in both Q A and 9 ~ the,N N outputs &, and d d are
aw aw aw aw aw weighted more heavily than + a due to the large values
of K D and K p . Therefore we can reduce the complex-
In both Scheme A and Scheme B, qr 4,.q,. are func- ity of the N N if we eliminate +a from the output and
tions of w so
replace it with the finite difference approximation
- - aqT
-[---] aqT aqT
aw -
aET
aw aw aw
where T is the sampling time. This simplified con-
troller, call Scheme C, is shown in Figure 3 in which
Evaluation of the derivatives $$ $ require the
only E and t are employed for N N training. The N N
knowledge of the plant model. Clearly the plant dy- controller in Scheme C is represented as
namics is not precisely known in our case. Our pro-
posal here is to use the ideal linear error equation(qd
is replaced by q,. in (5))

(ir +
- i )-k I c D ( q r - 4) I(P(q, - 9) = 0 (15) Consequently the number of internal weights are re-
duced approximately by one third. We note however
as an approximation to the plant dynamics by neglect- that one degree of freedom is lost in (20) so that its
ing the plant uncertainties. The most significant con- effectiveness in compensating robot uncertainties is re-
sequence of this approximation is that we have a linear duced. Simulations have confirmed this point.

880
VI Simulation Results I Scheme A I Scheme B I Scheme C 1
I n I 0.005 I 0.03 I 0.01 I
A three link elbow robot manipulator whose parame- a! 0.9 0.9 0.9
ters are taken from the first three links of Puma 560 E,, 0.20940 0.07511 3.5344
robot are used for simulation studies. The nominal
system parameter; are used as the basis in forming
the robot model D(q) and h(q,d.). A 10 I i g payload
uncertainty is attached t o the third link. Furthermore
Coulomb friction and viscous friction forces are added
+
t o each joint where f ( j ) = 5.0sgn(q) S.O(q). The VI1 Conclusion
sampling rate, T, is 5ms. Six hidden units are used in
the N N controller. The controller gains are selected as A new neural network control technique for robot
KO = diag[20,20,20] and K p = diag[100,100,100]. manipulator control is presented in this paper. The
The values for 7 and a! are listed in Table 1. The per- N N controller serves as the inverse model of the
formances of the basic control Scheme A and Scheme computed-torque controlled robot system. Three pos-
B are tested by commanding the end point t o track sible schemes are introduced for implementing the
a circular trajectory as shown in Figure 4. The cir- control strategy with varying degree of complexities.
cle has a period of 4 secs. The corresponding joint Simulation studies on trajectory tracking showed that
position and velocity errors for 2 cycles are shown in the proposed control technique works extremely well
Figure 5. It is clear that Scheme B converges faster and the controller converges very fast for on-line con-
with better accuracy than Scheme A. It is also seen trol. The performance of Scheme B clearly demon-
that the robot joint trajectories converged rapidly in strates the superiority of the proposed technique.
about 1 sec (one fourth of a cycle). The simulation Since the proposed schemes are aimed at modifying
results demonstrate the fast adaptive rate of the N N the desired input trajectory, it can be easily imple-
controller for meaningful on-line application. mented at the command trajectory planning level of
The results of Ep E,, E, in Table 1 are computed an existing controller without having t o modify the
during the second cycle of tracking (controller is well controllers internal structure as would be required by
converged after the first cycle). The update rate q is other existing schemes.
optimized for each case while a is fixed at ct = 0.9. We
see that Schemes A, B and C all performed well and
Scheme B is the best as expected. The improvement in References
accuracies provided by all the NN controller is clearly
demonstrated. K. Narendra and K. Parthasarathy, Identification
and control of dynamical systems using neural net-
Table 1. Circular tracking errors during the second works, IEEE Trans. on Neural Networks, vol. 1,
iteration(7 is optimized.) pp. 4-27, 1990.

I Scheme A I Scheme B I Scheme C T . Yabuta and T . Yamada, Learning control us-


I n I 0.006 I 0.06 I 0.05 ing neural networks, Proc. of the IEEE Inter-
Q 0.9 0.9 0.9 national Conference on Robotics and Automation,
0.0124 0.0034 0.0177 pp. 740-745,1991.
Ep
E,, I
0.5330 I
0.4586 1
3.0141 C. C. Ku and K. Y. Lee, Diagonal recurrent
E, I 0.0011 I 0.0002 I 0.0020 neural networks for nonlinear system control ,
IJCNN, pp. 315-319, 1992.

A. Ishiguro, T. Furuhashii, S. Okuma, and


Y. Uchikawa, A neural network compensator for
uncertainties of robot manipulator , IEEE Trans.
Table 2 lists the simulation results of tracking a com- on Industrial Electronics, vol. 39, pp. 61-66, De-
posite trajectory Again Scheme B is the best. The cember, 1992.
tracking response of Scheme B is shown in Figure 6.
H. Miyamoto, M. Kawato, T. Setoyama, and
Table 2. Composite tracking errors during the R. Suzuki, Feedback error learning neural net-
second iteration(q is optimized.) work for trajectory control of a robotic manipula-

881
tor, IEEE Trans. on Neural Networks, vol. 1, pp. .. . .:..
. . ..,,., .. . . .
........ . :.. ...,:.:: . :... .
251-265, 1988. ............ : ..... : .... :
. . . ...... . . . . ....,..
. .. .. ..<.: . . . . . ;. ... !.%.
j ...

T. Ozaky, T. Suzuki, T. Furuhashi, S. Okuma, and


Y . Uchikawa, Trajectory control of robotic ma-
nipulators using neural networks, IEEE Trans.
on Industrial Electronics, vol. 38, pp. 195-202,
1991.

S. Jung and T.C. Hsia, On-line neural net-


work control of robot manipulators, International 0.5
Conference on Neural Information Processing, pp.
1663-1668, Seoul, 1994. 0 0
x BYLS (in)

ComputedTorque Control Sysfem Figure 4: End Point Tracking of a Circular Trajectory


........................................................
1%; \
for a Three Link Robot using control (a) Scheme A
and (b) Scheme B

Figure 1: Scheme A:Inverse Control Structure for


Computed-Torque Control
P 00 - 2 4

(c) he(sec)
6 I
8

Figure 5: Joint Angle Tracking Errors for Circle Tra-


. .
jectory in Figure 4 where e?, = q d - q e, = q d - q.
I I

Figure 2: Scheme B : N N Compensator Structure for


Computed-Torque-Control 1
12

-00
-
6
e
N
1

P, s 06 a00

ComputedToque Control System


06
I
0 5 10 15
P
thns (662) bine (m)
d P
JdntlL), Joins(--), JomO( )
0 04

0 02
f
6 0
6
-0 02

Figure 3: Scheme C:Inverse Control Structure for 5 10 15 -Oo40 5 IO 15


bme (sac1 Ume (sec)
Computed-Torque Control
Figure 6: Composite Trajectory Tracking Response
and Joint errors for Scheme B

882