Acceso abierto

Application of the Kuka Kube Test-Bed for the Hardware-in-the-Loop Validation of the Space Manipulator Control System

Mateusz Wojtunik

Mateusz Wojtunik

Centrum Badań Kosmicznych Polskiej Akademii Nauk (CBK PAN)Warsaw, Poland
Buscar este autor en
Sciendo|Google Scholar
Wojtunik, Mateusz
, 
Piotr Łuczak

Piotr Łuczak

Lodz University of Technology, Institute of Automatic Control, Department of Robot ControlLodz, Poland
Buscar este autor en
Sciendo|Google Scholar
Łuczak, Piotr
, 
Tomasz Rybus

Tomasz Rybus

Centrum Badań Kosmicznych Polskiej Akademii Nauk (CBK PAN)Warsaw, Poland
Buscar este autor en
Sciendo|Google Scholar
Rybus, Tomasz
 y 
Grzegorz Granosik

Grzegorz Granosik

Lodz University of Technology, Institute of Automatic Control, Department of Robot ControlLodz, Poland
Buscar este autor en
Sciendo|Google Scholar
Granosik, Grzegorz
  
29 dic 2023
Application of the Kuka Kube Test-Bed for the Hardware-in-the-Loop Validation of the Space Manipulator Control System's Cover Image
Acerca de este artículo
Artículo anterior
Artículo siguiente
Cite
Descargar portada
Publicado en línea: 29 dic 2023
Páginas: 230 - 248
Recibido: 14 dic 2022
Aceptado: 17 ago 2023
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/arsa-2023-0025
Palabras clave
© 2023 Mateusz Wojtunik et al., published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Figure 1.

Schematic view of the n-DoF space manipulator
Schematic view of the n-DoF space manipulator

Figure 2.

KUKA KUBE test-bed
KUKA KUBE test-bed

Figure 3.

Communication diagram for KUKA KUBE test-bed hardware-in-the-loop experiments. Blue rectangles with continuous borders represent hardware components. Green, inner rectangles with dashed borders represent software components that were created or modified to perform the experiment. Brackets around parameters are added to improve subscript readability
Communication diagram for KUKA KUBE test-bed hardware-in-the-loop experiments. Blue rectangles with continuous borders represent hardware components. Green, inner rectangles with dashed borders represent software components that were created or modified to perform the experiment. Brackets around parameters are added to improve subscript readability

Figure 4.

Logical diagram for KUKA KUBE test-bed hardware-in-the-loop experiments
Logical diagram for KUKA KUBE test-bed hardware-in-the-loop experiments

Figure 5.

Schematic representation of the performed experiment
Schematic representation of the performed experiment

Figure 6.

Diagrammatic description of a single control loop iteration
Diagrammatic description of a single control loop iteration

Figure 7.

Frames captured by the camera mounted inside the KUKA KUBE test-bed that show the KUKA manipulator during experiments.From left to right: t = 0 (initial configuration), t = 6.6s, t = 13.3 s, t = 20 s (final configuration)
Frames captured by the camera mounted inside the KUKA KUBE test-bed that show the KUKA manipulator during experiments.From left to right: t = 0 (initial configuration), t = 6.6s, t = 13.3 s, t = 20 s (final configuration)

Figure 8.

Manipulator joint angular positions measured in the experiment and signal approximation for the comparison simulation
Manipulator joint angular positions measured in the experiment and signal approximation for the comparison simulation

Figure 9.

The approximation error for joint angular positions measured in the experiment
The approximation error for joint angular positions measured in the experiment

Figure 10.

Manipulator end-effector position and orientation with respect to the simulated inertial frame Πine – comparison with the simulation results
Manipulator end-effector position and orientation with respect to the simulated inertial frame Πine – comparison with the simulation results

Figure 11.

Difference in manipulator end-effector position and orientation with respect to the simulated inertial frame Πine between the experimental and simulation results
Difference in manipulator end-effector position and orientation with respect to the simulated inertial frame Πine between the experimental and simulation results

Figure 12.

Satellite position and attitude with respect to the simulated inertial frame Πine – comparison with the simulation results
Satellite position and attitude with respect to the simulated inertial frame Πine – comparison with the simulation results

Figure 13.

Difference in satellite position and attitude with respect to the simulated inertial frame Πine between experimental and simulation results
Difference in satellite position and attitude with respect to the simulated inertial frame Πine between experimental and simulation results

Figure 14.

Time of evaluation for each iteration of the MATLAB loop
Time of evaluation for each iteration of the MATLAB loop

Figure 15.

The net torque acting on the second manipulator joint – comparison with the simulation
The net torque acting on the second manipulator joint – comparison with the simulation

Figure 16.

The net torque acting on each manipulator joint – comparison with the simulation
The net torque acting on each manipulator joint – comparison with the simulation

Figure 17.

The difference in net torque acting on each manipulator joint between the experimental and simulation results
The difference in net torque acting on each manipulator joint between the experimental and simulation results

KUKA LBR iiwa 14 R820 DH table

i αi [deg] θmi [deg] ai [m] di [m]
1 90 θm1 0 0.360
2 −90 θm2 0 0
3 −90 θm3 0 0.420
4 90 θm4 0 0
5 90 θm5 0 0.400
6 −90 θm6 0 0
7 0 θm7 + 180 0 0.126
Idioma:
Inglés
Calendario de la edición:
4 veces al año
Temas de la revista:
Geociencias, Geociencias, otros
RSS Feed de revista