See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/317095083

A Comparative Study of Two Methods for Forward Kinematics and Jacobian

Matrix Determination

Conference Paper · May 2017

DOI: 10.1109/ICMSC.2017.7959467

CITATIONS READS
2 356

2 authors:

Abdel-Nasser Sharkawy Nikos A. Aspragathos

South Valley University University of Patras
17 PUBLICATIONS   64 CITATIONS    263 PUBLICATIONS   2,477 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Active Suspension System_M.Sc. Thesis View project

Contactless micro - Manipulation with Electric Fields View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Abdel-Nasser Sharkawy on 05 October 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 2017 International Conference on Mechanical, System and Control Engineering

A Comparative Study of Two Methods for Forward Kinematics and Jacobian

Matrix Determination

Abdel-Nasser Sharkawy1, 2, Nikos Aspragathos2

1
Mechanical Engineering Department
Faculty of Engineering, South Valley University
Qena 83523, Egypt
2
Department of Mechanical Engineering and Aeronautics
University of Patras
Rio 26504, Greece
e-mail: eng.abdelnassersharkawy@gmail.com, asprag@mech.upatras.

Abstract—In this paper, a comparative study of two methods
are presented to determine the forward kinematics and
Jacobian matrix for any serial manipulator, based on product
of exponentials formula and unit dual quaternion algebra. This
comparison is qualitative and particularly quantitative taken
into account computational costs and memory requirements
that are very critical in the manipulator control and real-time
algorithms. For the first time the computational cost in
determining the Jacobian matrix by using these two algorithms
is compared. The two algorithms are applied to the 7-DOF
Kuka Lightweight Robot using MATLAB and compared.
Keywords-forward kinematics; jacobian matrix; product of
exponentials; dual quaternion; comparison; kuka robot
I. INTRODUCTION
The most popular method used in robot kinematics is
based on the Denavit-Hartenberg (D-H) notation for
definition of spatial mechanisms and on the homogeneous
transformation of points [1]. Many researchers sought to find
algorithms based on appropriate theories for representing the
rigid body motions in space and to make them well
understandable and improve their efficiency.
Alternative approaches based on screw theory were
proposed in robot kinematics and the most important ones
are expressed via unit dual quaternions [2] or exponentials of
twists [3]. In screw theory, every transformation of a rigid
body or a coordinate system with respect to a reference
coordinate system can be expressed by a screw displacement,
which is a translation along an axis with a rotation about the
same axis [4]. As an efficient tool to describe rigid
transformation, the unit dual quaternion has been applied in
various fields, such as robotics, mechanical design, computer
graphics and vision as well as navigation [5, 6, 7]. The dual
quaternion deals with line representation and transformation
instead of point representation and transformation under
exponentials of twists.
Aspragathos and Dimitros [8] compared unit dual
quaternion method based on the transformation and
representation of joint axes with the homogenous
transformation method and Lie algebra representation. They
found that the unit dual quaternion and Lie algebra based
methods offer a more compact and consistent way for the
definition of the end-effector than the homogeneous
transformation one. Sariyildiz et al [9] compared three
inverse kinematic formulation methods for the serial
industrial robot manipulators based on screw theory. The
first one was based on quaternion algebra, the second one
was based on dual quaternions, and the last one was the
exponential mapping method. They found that the method
which is based on dual quaternion gives the most compact
and computationally efficient solution. In both of the
previous publications the computational cost of the forward
kinematic equations was considered but not the one for the
Jacobian matrix calculation.
The unit dual quaternions are used in the design of
controllers for rigid bodies and manipulators. Erol Özgüra,
Youcef Mezouarb [10] used unit dual quaternions to model
the kinematics and to design a controller for the pose of a
robot arm. They presented the computational cost for the
Jacobian calculation based on the exponentials of the unit
dual quaternions. They found that this modeling is compact
and computationally efficient and then suitable for real time
control applications. Pham and his group [11] presented an
unified position and orientation control for robot manipulator
by describing the end-effector motion as a dual quaternion
involving the translation and rotation. Their simulation and
experimental results highlighted the efficiency and
performance of this controller.
In a recent paper [12], a robust controller was presented
for robot manipulators using unit dual quaternion that allows
an advanced representation of the end-effector
transformation without decoupling the rotational and
translational dynamics. So the investigation of the
computational efficiency of the robot kinematics and
dynamics is very important for controllers design and other
real-time considerations.
In this paper, the forward kinematics using two
algorithms; product of exponentials (PoE) formula and unit
dual quaternion are presented. Mathematical analysis of the
main steps of these algorithms is performed in order to
facilitate their comparison in qualitative and quantitative
terms. Compactness, easiness of understanding and
representation and transformations, computational costs and
memory requirements are considered. In addition, the
Jacobian matrix is determined using both approaches and for
the first time a comparison is made between these algorithms

978-1-5090-6530-1/17/$31.00 ©2017 IEEE 179

considering the computational time for the Jacobian
calculation. The two methods are applied to the 7-DOF Kuka
LWR Robot using MATLAB to determine the forward
kinematics and Jacobian matrix and are compared.
II. PRODUCT OF EXPONENTIALS (POE) FORMULA
The product of exponential formula presents some
significant advantages compared to the D-H formulation
since it uses only the base and tool frames and the
determination of the twists is quite easy and compact
representation of the joint axes. The well-known equations
are presented for the facilitation of the computational burden
calculation and the reader can find details in the presented
references.
Using the Product of Exponentials (PoE) formula, the
forward kinematics equations for a serial manipulator with ߠ
the vector of the joint are the following [3];
෨ ෨ ෨ dual quaternions, where the representation and
transformation matrix. The body Jacobian can be derived by
using an adjoin transformation between the body and spatial
frames.
III. UNIT DUAL QUATERNION APPROACH
The advantages of the spatial representation and
transformation of the rigid bodies are well justified in the
relative literature [13]. Among them are the following: the
singularity-free and un-ambiguous representation, the most
efficient and compact form for representing rigid transforms,
and the unified representation of translation and rotation. In
addition, it can be integrated with little coding effort; unit
dual quaternions can be used for smooth translational and
rotational interpolation and proper formulation of the
combined error in control systems.
In [8], a recursive algorithm is presented to solve the
forward kinematic problem for any serial robot based on unit
݃௦௧ ሺߠሻ ൌ ݁ కభ ఏభ ǥ ݁ క೔ ఏ೔ Ǥ Ǥ Ǥ ݁ క೘ ఏ೘ ݃௦௧ ሺͲሻ transformation of the joint axes are considered rather than
where point based approaches. The dual angle ߙො௜ǡ௜ାଵ between the
෥ ೔ ఏ೔
unit line vectors ‫ݏ‬Ƹ௜ and ‫ݏ‬Ƹ௜ାଵ is defined as ߙො௜ǡ௜ାଵ ൌ  ߙ௜ ൅ ߝ‫ܮ‬௜
ఠ ൫‫ ܫ‬െ ݁ ఠ෥೔ ఏ೔ ൯ሺ߱௜ ൈ ‫ݒ‬௜ ሻ
݁ క౟ఏ೔ ൌ ൤݁
෨
൨ and the dual angle ߠ෠௜ between the unit line vectors ݊ො௜ିଵǡ௜ and
Ͳ ͳ
݊ො௜ǡ௜ାଵ is defined asߠ෠௜ ൌ ߠ௜ ൅ ߝ݀௜ .
߱୶ଶ ‫ݒ‬ఏ ൅ ܿఏ ߱୶ ߱୷ ‫ݒ‬ఏ െ ߱୸ ‫ݏ‬ఏ ߱୶ ߱୸ ‫ݒ‬ఏ ൅ ߱୷ ‫ݏ‬ఏ
Here we present the recursive formulas in an analytic
݁ ఠ෥೔ఏ೔ ൌ ቎߱୶ ߱୷ ‫ݒ‬ఏ ൅ ߱୸ ‫ݏ‬ఏ  ߱୷ଶ ‫ݒ‬ఏ ൅ ܿఏ ߱୷ ߱୸ ‫ݒ‬ఏ െ ߱୶ ‫ݏ‬ఏ ቏ way in order to facilitate the calculation of the required
߱୶ ߱୸ ‫ݒ‬ఏ െ ߱୷ ‫ݏ‬ఏ ߱୷ ߱୸ ‫ݒ‬ఏ ൅ ߱ଵ ‫ݏ‬ఏ ߱୸ଶ‫ݒ‬ఏ ൅ ܿఏ operations. The unit dual quaternion for the transformation
݃௦௧ ሺͲሻ is the transformation between tool and base frames at between the unit line vectors ݊ො௜ିଵǡ௜ and ݊ො௜ǡ௜ାଵ is given by
the reference configuration (ߠ = 0), ߦሚ௜ is the twist of the ith
joint axis shown in Fig. 1 with߱௜ ǡ ‫ݍ‬௜ ܴ߳ଷ , ߱௜ is the unit ܳ෠௜ ൌ …‘• ߠ෠௜ ൅ ‫ݏ‬Ƹ௜ •‹ ߠ෠௜ ൌ ൫ܿ‫ߠݏ݋‬௜ ൅ ߝሺെ݀௜ ‫ߠ݊݅ݏ‬௜ ሻ൯ ൅
vector defining the twist, ‫ݍ‬௜ is a point on the joint axis,
and ܿఏ ൌ ܿ‫ߠݏ݋‬௜ ǡ ‫ݏ‬ఏ ൌ ‫ߠ݊݅ݏ‬௜ ǡ ‫ݒ‬ఏ ൌ ͳ െ ܿ‫ߠݏ݋‬௜ , m is the ‫ݏ‬ଶ ‫ߠ݊݅ݏ‬௜ ൅ ߝሺ݀௜ ‫ݏ‬ଶ ܿ‫ߠݏ݋‬௜ ൅ ‫ݏ‬ଶ ௢ ‫ߠ݊݅ݏ‬௜ ሻ
number of degrees of freedom, the symbol ~ refers to the ቎‫ݏ‬ଷ ‫ߠ݊݅ݏ‬௜ ൅ ߝሺ݀௜ ‫ݏ‬ଷ ܿ‫ߠݏ݋‬௜ ൅ ‫ݏ‬ଷ ௢ ‫ߠ݊݅ݏ‬௜ ሻ቏ ൌ ‫ݍ‬ො ൅ ‫ݍ‬ො (3)
twist and skew-symmetric matrix and the symbol ^ refers to
the unit dual quaternion. ‫ݏ‬ସ ‫ߠ݊݅ݏ‬௜ ൅ ߝሺ݀௜ ‫ݏ‬ସ ܿ‫ߠݏ݋‬௜ ൅ ‫ݏ‬ସ ௢ ‫ߠ݊݅ݏ‬௜ ሻ

where ‫ݍ‬ො is the scalar part and ‫ݍ‬ොis the vector part ofܳ෠௜ .
Since‫ݏ‬Ƹ௜ is perpendicular to ݊ො௜ିଵǡ௜ as shown in “Fig.1” then
the unit dual line vector ݊ො௜ǡ௜ାଵ is determined by the
transformation of the݊ො௜ିଵǡ௜ [14]:
ܰଶ ൅ ߝܰଶ ௢
݊ො௜ǡ௜ାଵ ൌ ܳ෠௜ ݊ො௜ିଵǡ௜ ൌ ‫ݍ‬ො ൈ ݊ො ൅ ‫ݍ‬ො݊ො ൌ ቎ܰଷ ൅ ߝܰଷ ௢ ቏ (4)
ܰସ ൅ ߝܰସ ௢
where ݊ොis the vector part of݊ො௜ିଵǡ௜ . The unit dual quaternion
Figure 1. The definition of the twists and unit dual quaternions and for the transformation between the unit line vectors ‫ݏ‬Ƹ௜ and
vectors in successive joint axes. ‫ݏ‬Ƹ௜ାଵ is given by
According to the above presented forward kinematics the ܳ෠௜ǡ௜ାଵ ൌ …‘• ߙො௜ǡ௜ାଵ ൅ ݊ො௜ǡ௜ାଵ •‹ ߙො௜ǡ௜ାଵ ൌ
spatial Jacobian is determined as [3];
‫ܬ‬௦௧
௦
ሺߠሻ ൌ ሾߦଵ  ߦଶ ᇱ ǥ ǥ ߦ௠ ᇱ ሿ

where ߦ௜ ᇱ ൌ ‫݀ܣ‬ቀ௘ ഍෩భഇభ ǥǥǤ௘ ഍෩೔షభഇ೔షభ ቁ ߦ௜
Each column of the Jacobian is formulated by the
transformation of the reference joint twists to the current
configuration of the manipulator, so its calculation depends
heavily on the calculation of the adjoint of the relative
ቀܿ‫ ݅ߙݏ݋‬൅ ܰͳ ‫ ݅ߙ݊݅ݏ‬൅ ߝሺ‫ ݅ߙݏ݋ܿ ͳܰ ݅ܮ‬൅ ܰͳ ‫ ݅ߙ݊݅ݏ ݋‬െ ‫ ݅ߙ݊݅ݏ ݅ܮ‬ሻቁ
ܰʹ ‫ ݅ߙ݊݅ݏ‬൅ ߝ൫‫ ݅ߙݏ݋ܿ ʹܰ ݅ܮ‬൅ ܰʹ ‫ ݅ߙ݊݅ݏ ݋‬൯
‫݋‬
൅ ൦ ܰ͵ ‫ ݅ߙ݊݅ݏ‬൅ ߝ൫‫ ݅ߙݏ݋ܿ ͵ܰ ݅ܮ‬൅ ܰ͵ ‫ ݅ߙ݊݅ݏ‬൯ ൪ (5)
ܰͶ ‫ ݅ߙ݊݅ݏ‬൅ ߝ൫‫ܰ ݅ܮ‬Ͷ ܿ‫ ݅ߙݏ݋‬൅ ܰͶ ‫ ݅ߙ݊݅ݏ ݋‬൯

180
 Then the instantaneous spatial velocity of the end-effector as the
‫ݏ‬Ƹ௜ାଵ ൌ  ܳ෠௜ǡ௜ାଵ ‫ݏ‬Ƹ௜ (6) following equation
Equation (6) is not presented in the extended form since
the computational cost is equal to the one of (4). ‫ ܬ‬ൌ ሾ‫ݏ‬Ƹଵ  ‫ݏ‬Ƹଶ ǥ‫ݏ‬Ƹ௜ ǥ ‫ݏ‬Ƹ௠ ሿ (14)
According to [8] for the computation of the position
vector of the end effector only the primary parts of the dual ‫ ݏ‬௢
where ‫ݏ‬Ƹ௜ ൌ ൤ ௜ ൨ and this equation gives the same results
unit vectors are required as ‫ݏ‬௜
using the product of exponential formula based Jacobian
‫݌‬௠ ൌ  σ௠
௜ୀଵሺ݀௜ ‫ݏ‬௜ ൅  ‫ܮ‬௜ ܽ௜ǡ௜ାଵ ሻ (7) matrix given by (2).
The transformation matrix ௠଴ܶ that presents the end IV. COMPUTATIONAL TIME FOR THE TWO ALGORITHMS
effector frame relative to the base frame is calculated by
using only the primary parts of the dual unit vectors: Using the equations presented in the two previous
sections the computational burden for each method is
݊௠ǡ௠ାଵ ‫ݏ‬௠ାଵ  ൈ  ݊௠ǡ௠ାଵ ‫ݏ‬௠ାଵ ‫݌‬௠
଴
௠ܶ ൌ ቂ    ቃ (8) determined. For the forward kinematics, the entire sum of the
Ͳ Ͳ Ͳ ͳ required multiplications and additions of simple real
In most of manipulator control systems the Jacobian is numbers are calculated and analytically presented for two
used, so its fast determination is quite critical. The methods in the Table Ι along with the respective equations.
instantaneous first order kinematics can be solved assuming
TABLE I. NUMBER OF OPERATIONS FOR THE FORWARD KINEMATICS
that the forward kinematics were determined. To derive the
Jacobian matrix using unit dual quaternions, the following Product of Exponential Formula
equations illustrate the Velocity relations – Jacobians [2].
Term Additions Multiplications
݁ ఠ෥೔ఏ೔ (eq.1) 18 33
σ௠ ෠ሶ ෠ መ ௢
௜ୀଵ ߠప ‫ݏ‬Ƹ ௜ ൌ ܸ ܵ ൌ ሺ߱ ൅ ߝ‫ݒ‬ሻሺ‫ ݏ‬൅ ߝ‫ ݏ‬ሻ (9)
൫‫ ܫ‬െ ݁ ఠ෥೔ఏ೔ ൯ 3 0
where ߠ෠పሶ ൌ ߠሶ௜ ൅ ߝ݀ሶ௜ and ‫ݏ‬Ƹ௜ ൌ ‫ݏ‬௜ ൅ ߝ•௜ ௢ , so (9) can be ሺ߱௜ ൈ ‫ݒ‬௜ ሻ 3 6
written as the following equation: ൫‫ ܫ‬െ ݁ ෥ ೔ ఏ೔
ఠ
൯ሺ߱௜ ൈ ‫ݒ‬௜ ሻ 6 9
෨
௠ ௠ Overall ݁ క౟ ఏ೔ (eq.1) 30 48

෍ ߠ෠పሶ ‫ݏ‬Ƹ௜ ൌ ෍ ൣߠሶ௜ ‫ݏ‬௜ ൅ ߝ൫ߠሶ௜ ‫ݏ‬௜ ௢ ൅ ݀ሶ௜ ‫ݏ‬௜ ൯൧ Multiplication of two 4 36 48
௜ୀଵ ௜ୀଵ X 4 transformation matrices
Total operations for m 30m + 36m = 48m +48m =
ൌ ߱‫ ݏ‬൅ ߝሺ‫ ݏ‬௢ ߱ ൅ ‫ݒݏ‬ሻ (10) Link Robot 66m 96m
Unit Dual Quaternion Method
For rotational joints,݀ሶ௜ ൌ ͲǤͲ, then
Dual Part is included

߱‫ ݏ‬ൌ σ௠ ሶ ௢
, ‫ ߱ ݏ‬൅ ‫ ݒݏ‬ൌ σ௠ ሶ ௢ (11) ܳ෠୧ (eq.3) 3 13
௜ୀଵ ߠ௜ ‫ݏ‬௜ ௜ୀଵ ߠ௜ ‫ݏ‬௜
݊ො௜ǡ௜ାଵ (eq.4) 21 27
௠ ௠

‫ ݒݏ‬ൌ െ‫ ݏ‬௢ ߱ ൅ ෍ ߠሶ௜ ‫ݏ‬௜ ௢ ൌ ෍ሺ‫݌‬௜ െ ‫݌‬௠ାଵ ሻ ൈ  ‫ݏ‬௜ ߠሶ௜ ܳ෠௜ǡ௜ାଵ (eq.5) 3 13
௜ୀଵ ௜ୀଵ ‫ݏ‬Ƹ௜ାଵ (eq.6) 21 27

ൌ σ௠ ‫ݏ‬௜ ൈ ሺ‫݌‬௠ାଵ െ ‫݌‬௜ ሻߠሶ௜  (12)

‫݌‬௠ (eq.7) 6 6
௜ୀଵ
 ‫ݏ‬௠ାଵ  ൈ  ݊௠ǡ௠ାଵ (eq.8) 3 6
௢ ௢
where ‫ ݏ‬ൌ  ‫݌‬௠ାଵ ൈ ‫ ݏ‬, ‫ݏ‬௜ ൌ ‫݌‬௜  ൈ  ‫ݏ‬௜ . From (12), the
Jacobian Matrix is derived as the following; Total operations for m 54m + 3 86m + 6
Link Robot
‫ ݏ‬ൈ ሺ‫݌‬௠ାଵ െ ‫݌‬௜ ሻ ‫ ݏ‬ൈ ‫݌‬௠ାଵ െ ‫ݏ‬௜ ൈ ‫݌‬௜
‫ܬ‬௜ ൌ ൤ ௜ ൨ൌቂ ௜ ‫ݏ‬௜ ቃ Dual Part is ignored
‫ݏ‬௜
௢ ܳ෠௜ (eq.3) 0 3
‫ ݏ‬ൈ ‫݌‬௠ାଵ െ  ‫ݏ‬௜
ൌ൤ ௜ ൨ (13) ݊ො௜ǡ௜ାଵ (eq.4) 6 9
‫ݏ‬௜
where ܳ෠௜ǡ௜ାଵ (eq.5) 0 3
‫ݏ‬Ƹ௜ାଵ (eq.6) 6 9
‫݌‬௠ାଵ ൌ ݊௠ାଵ  ൈ  ݊௠ାଵ ௢ 
൅ ሺሺ‫ݏ‬௠ାଵ  ൈ ‫ݏ‬௠ାଵ ௢ ሻ் ݊௠ାଵ ሻ݊௠ାଵ ‫݌‬௠ (eq.7) 6 6
‫ݏ‬௠ାଵ  ൈ  ݊௠ǡ௠ାଵ (eq.8) 3 6
Jacobian matrix can be determined also based on the Total operations for m 18m + 3 30m + 6
equation ܸ௦௧௦  ൌ ‫ܬ‬௦௧
௦
ሺߠሻߠሶ  and ߦ௜ ᇱ ൌ  ‫ݏ‬Ƹ௜ where ܸ௦௧௦  represents Link Robot

181
 For the determination of the number of operations the forward kinematics and Jacobian matrix. For the forward
required for the calculation of the Jacobian matrix it is kinematics, unit dual quaternion requires 54m + 3 and 18m
supposed that the forward kinematics were done so the +3 additions using dual part and ignoring it respectively
required operations for this are not recalculated. In the compared with product of exponentials that requires 66m.
෨
product of exponential the calculation of ݁ క೔ఏ೔ and for the For multiplications, unit dual quaternion requires 86m + 6
multiplications of the 4 X 4 transformation matrices are and 30m + 6 using dual part and ignoring it respectively and
ready from forward kinematics. For the determination of the the product of exponential requires 96m. For the Jacobian
Jacobian based on unit dual quaternions,‫ݏ‬௜ and ‫ݏ‬௜ ௢ are ready matrix, unit dual quaternion requires 6m + 21 additions
from the forward kinematics. For the Jacobian matrix compared with product of exponentials that requires 30m -
calculation, the number of operations for the two methods is 30. For multiplications, unit dual quaternion requires 6m +
shown analytically in the Table ΙΙ. 60 and the product of exponential requires 45m - 45. In case
of the Jacobian given by (14) which is identical to the one
TABLE II. NUMBER OF OPERATIONS FOR THE JACOBIAN MATRIX given by (2), the computational cost is zero since the unit
CALCULATIONS. dual vector is calculated in the forward kinematics by (6).
Product of Exponential Formula
Therefore for real time applications and kinematic control of
serial manipulators the unit dual quaternion representation is
Term Additions Multiplications
preferable.
Adjoint Matrix = ‫݀ܣ‬௚ 9 18 It is clear that the number of calculations is lower by
Multiplication †୥ 21 27 using the unit dual quaternion method and it is known that
by ߦ௜ (eq.2) unit dual quaternion requires 8 memory locations for the
Overall Operations for 30 (m -1) = 45 (m -1) = representation of position and 3 memory locations for the
m Link Robot 30m - 30 45m - 45 orientation despite of the product of exponential that is based
Unit Dual Quaternion Method on the 4 X 4 transformation matrices that require 16 memory
locations for both the position and orientation so the storage
‫݌‬୫ାଵ 21 60
in a memory needs less space. Therefore the computational
‫ݏ‬௜ ൈ ‫݌‬௠ାଵ െ  ‫ݏ‬௜ ௢ 6 6 costs and memory requirements are lower in unit dual
( eq.13)
quaternion. The explanation of the physical meaning of the
Overall Operations for 6m + 21 6m + 60 parameters and operations in dual quaternion and PoE shows
m Link Robot
that the intuitive understanding of the combined orientation
and translation it is easier in unit dual quaternion based
A comparison of the number of mathematical operations algorithm.
required for the computation of the end-effector position and
orientations and the Jacobian matrix versus the number of V. APPLICATIONS OF THE ALGORITHMS IN KUKA LWR
joints using the two methods is presented in Fig. 2. ROBOT

Figure 2. Mathematical operations required vs. the number of DOF of a

manipulator.
The comparative study illustrates that the unit dual
quaternions require considerably lower number of arithmetic
operations (additions and multiplications) compared with the
product of exponential formula as the number of DOF
regardless taking into account the dual part or not for both
Figure 3. Denavit-Hartenberg and the twist of the 7-DOF Kuka Robot.
In this section, the two algorithms are applied to 7-DOF
Kuka LWR Robot presented in Fig. 3 and programmed in
Matlab to determine its forward kinematics and Jacobian
matrix for the verification and demonstration of the

182
 compared algorithms. To our knowledge is the first time that
the POE and unit dual quaternion are used for the forward
kinematics and the Jacobian determination of the 7-DOF
Kuka LWR and in addition that are programmed and the
required operations are compared. In KUKA Control
Toolbox [15] the forward kinematics are based on
homogeneous transformations and the Jacobian is not
determined.
After the calculation of forward kinematics, it is found
that the two algorithms give the same results for the forward
kinematics but with different calculation time. There is a
difference in the results of the Jacobian matrix given by (2)
and the one given by (13); since in the case of the product of
exponential formula, the angular component is the
instantaneous angular velocity of the body as viewed in the
spatial frame, however the linear component is not the
velocity of the origin of the end-effector frame, rather it is
the velocity of a possibly imaginary point on the rigid body
which is traveling through the origin of the spatial frame at
time t, as it is stressed in [3]. If the Jacobian given by (13) is
used then the calculated translational velocity is the one of
the origin of the end-effector frame.
The computational time required by the corresponding
Matlab programs is not compared because this depends on
the way of programming. From the general comparison of
the two algorithms illustrated in section 4, for the 7-DOF
LWR Kuka robot (m=7), the forward kinematics requires
672 multiplications and 462 additions using the Product of
Exponential formula and 608 multiplications and 381
additions using the unit Dual Quaternion taking into
consideration the dual part while in the case of ignoring the
dual part, 216 multiplications and 129 additions are required.
The Jacobian matrix requires 270 multiplications and 180
additions based on Product of Exponential formula and 102
multiplications and 63 additions using the unit Dual
Quaternion algorithm.
From the analytic presentation of the algorithms and its
programming in Matlab, it is clear that unit dual quaternions
present higher compactness and facilitates the understanding
of the geometrical meaning of the joint axes. Therefore, the
wider use of these methods into the robotics community has
to be considered particularly the dual quaternion approach in
the manipulator control of simultaneous rotation and
translation of the end-effector.
VI. CONCLUSION
In this paper, two methods are presented in an
algorithmic way for the formulation of the kinematic
equations and Jacobian matrix of serial manipulators. The
comparative study including the calculation of the number of
arithmetic operations (additions and multiplications) as an
index of the computational costs for each algorithm are
determined and compared. The unit Dual Quaternion Method
is proved more effective than the Product of Exponential
formula as the number of the robot degrees of freedom
increases.
Unit Dual Quaternion offers a more compact and
consistent way than the product of exponential formula for
determining the Jacobian Matrix and needs less
183
View publication stats
computational time and memory requirements. Calculations
of the forward kinematics and Jacobian matrix using these
two algorithms are applied and programmed in Matlab on the
7-DOF LWR Kuka Robot and are compared. According to
the quantitative comparison and the presented qualitative
advantages of the unit dual quaternion approach it is clear
that for real-time applications and manipulator control the
dual quaternions is much preferable than PoE.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Abdel-Nasser Sharkawy is funded by the “Egyptian
Cultural Affairs & Missions Sector” and “Hellenic Ministry
of Foreign Affairs Scholarship” for Ph.D. study in Greece.
REFERENCES
[1] Donald L. Pieper, The kinematics of manipulators under computer
control. PhD, 1968.
[2] J. Kim and V. R. Kumar, “Kinematics of Robot Manipulators via
Line Transformations,” J. Robot. Syst., vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 649–674,
1990.
[3] R. M. Murray, Z. Li, and S. S. Sastry, A Mathematical Introduction to
Robotic Manipulation. CRC Press, 1994.
[4] J. D. Adams and D. E. Whitney, “Application of Screw Theory to
Constraint Analysis of Mechanical,” Trans. ASME, vol. 123, pp. 26–
32, March 2001.
[5] A. Perez and J. M. McCarthy, “Dual Quaternion Synthesis of
Constrained Robotic Systems,” J. Mech. Des., vol. 126, pp. 425–435,
May 2004.
[6] Y. WU, X. HU, D. HU, T. LI, and J. LIAN, “Strapdown Inertial
Navigation System Algorithms Based on Dual Quaternions,” IEEE
Trans. Aerosp. Electron. Syst., vol. 41, no. 1, 2005.
[7] P. N. Azariadis and N. A. Aspragathos, “Computer Graphic
Representation and Transformation of Geometric Entities using Dual
Unit Vectors and Line Transformations,” Comput. Graph., vol. 25, no.
2, 2001.
[8] N. A. Aspragathos and J. K. Dimitros, “A Comparative Study of
Three Methods for Robot Kinematics,” IEEE Trans. Syst. MAN,
Cybern. B Cybern., vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 135–145, 1998.
[9] E. Sariyildiz, E. Cakiray, and H. Temeltas, “A Comparative Study of
Three Inverse Kinematic Methods of Serial Industrial Robot
Manipulators in the Screw Theory Framework,” Int. J. Adv. Robot.
Syst., vol. 8, no. 5, pp. 9–24, 2011.
[10] E. Özgür and Y. Mezouar, “Kinematic modeling and control of a
robot arm using unit dual quaternions,” Rob. Auton. Syst., vol. 77, pp.
66–73, 2016.
[11] H. Pham, V. Perdereau, B. V. Adorno, and P. Fraisse, “Position and
Orientation Control of Robot Manipulators Using Dual Quaternion
Feedback,” in 2010 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent
Robots and Systems (IROS), pp. 658–663, 2010.
[12] L. F. C. Figueredo, B. V Adorno, J. Y. Ishihara, and G. A. Borges,
“Robust kinematic control of manipulator robots using dual
quaternion representation,” in 2013 IEEE International Conference on
Robotics and Automation (ICRA), pp. 1949–1955, 2013.
[13] B. Kenwright, “Inverse Kinematics with Dual-Quaternions,
Exponential-Maps , and Joint Limits,” Int. J. Adv. Intell. Syst., vol. 6,
no. 1, pp. 53–65, 2013.
[14] J. Rooney, “A comparison of representations of general spatial screw
displacement,” Environ. Plan. B Plan. Des., vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 45–88,
1978.
[15] F. Chinello, S. Scheggi, F. Morbidi, and D. Prattichizzo, “The KUKA
Control Toolbox : motion control of kuka robot manipulators with
matlab,” IEEE Robot. Autom. Mag., pp. 1–10, 2010.