Contacts between robots and environment are often assumed to be rigid for control purposes. This assumption can lead to poor performance when contacts are soft and/or underdamped. However, the problem of balancing on soft contacts has not received much attention in the literature. This paper presents two novel approaches to control a legged robot balancing on visco-elastic contacts, and compares them to other two state-of-the-art methods. Our simulation results show that performance heavily depends on the contact stiffness and the noises/uncertainties introduced in the simulation. Briefly, the two novel controllers performed best for soft/medium contacts, whereas “inverse-dynamics control under rigid-contact assumptions” was the best one for stiff contacts. Admittance control was instead the most robust, but suffered in terms of performance. These results shed light on this challenging problem, while pointing out interesting directions for future investigation.
Reactive balance control for legged robots under visco-elastic contacts / Flayols, Thomas; Del Prete, Andrea; Khadiv, Majid; Mansard, Nicolas; Righetti, Ludovic. - In: APPLIED SCIENCES. - ISSN 2076-3417. - 11:1(2021), pp. 353.1-353.23. [10.3390/app11010353]
Reactive balance control for legged robots under visco-elastic contacts
Del Prete, Andrea;
2021-01-01
Abstract
Contacts between robots and environment are often assumed to be rigid for control purposes. This assumption can lead to poor performance when contacts are soft and/or underdamped. However, the problem of balancing on soft contacts has not received much attention in the literature. This paper presents two novel approaches to control a legged robot balancing on visco-elastic contacts, and compares them to other two state-of-the-art methods. Our simulation results show that performance heavily depends on the contact stiffness and the noises/uncertainties introduced in the simulation. Briefly, the two novel controllers performed best for soft/medium contacts, whereas “inverse-dynamics control under rigid-contact assumptions” was the best one for stiff contacts. Admittance control was instead the most robust, but suffered in terms of performance. These results shed light on this challenging problem, while pointing out interesting directions for future investigation.File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
applsci-11-00353-v2.pdf
accesso aperto
Tipologia:
Versione editoriale (Publisher’s layout)
Licenza:
Creative commons
Dimensione
3.05 MB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
3.05 MB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione