IFAC Conference

Management and on Manufacturing Modelling,

Control
IFAC Conference
Management
IFAC and on
Conference Manufacturing
Control
on Manufacturing Modelling,
IFAC
June
IFAC Conference
28-30, 2016.
Conference
Management and on
Troyes,
on France Modelling,
Manufacturing
Manufacturing
Control Modelling,
Modelling,
June 28-30,
Management
Management 2016.
and
and Troyes,
Control
Control France Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
Management
June 28-30,
June and
28-30, 2016. Control
2016. Troyes,
Troyes, France
France
June 28-30, 2016. Troyes, France
June 28-30, 2016. Troyes, France
ScienceDirect
A
A genetic
genetic algorithm
algorithm approach
approach for for parameter
parameter optimization
IFAC-PapersOnLine 49-12
optimization of
(2016) 1261–1266
of a
a 7DOF
7DOF robotic
robotic
A
A genetic
genetic algorithm
algorithm approach
approach for
for parameter
manipulator
parameter optimization of a 7DOF robotic
A genetic algorithm approach
A genetic algorithm approach for for parameter optimization of a 7DOF robotic
parameter
manipulator optimization
optimization of
of a
a 7DOF
7DOF robotic
robotic
manipulator
manipulator
manipulator
manipulator
C. West*, A. Montazeri*, S. D. Monk*, C.J. Taylor*
C. West*, A. Montazeri*, S.  D. Monk*, C.J. Taylor*
C.
C. West*,
West*, A. A. Montazeri*,
Montazeri*, S.  D.
S. D. Monk*,
Monk*, C.J. C.J. Taylor*
Taylor*
C. West*, A. Montazeri*, S. D.
D. Monk*, C.J. Taylor*
*Engineering Department, C. West*, Lancaster University,
A. Montazeri*,  Gillow
S. Monk*,Avenue, C.J.Lancaster,
Taylor* England, LA14YW
*Engineering Department, Lancaster University, Gillow Avenue, Lancaster, England, LA14YW
*Engineering
*Engineering (Tel: +44 (0)Lancaster
Department,
Department, 1524 593660, e-mail:Gillow
University, a.montazeri@lancaster.ac.uk)
Avenue, Lancaster,
Lancaster, England, England, LA14YW
*Engineering
*Engineering Department, (Tel: +44 (0)Lancaster
Department, 1524 593660,
Lancaster
Lancaster
University,
e-mail:Gillow
University,
University, Gillow
Gillow
Avenue,
a.montazeri@lancaster.ac.uk)
Avenue,
Avenue, Lancaster,
Lancaster, England, England, LA14YW
LA14YW
LA14YW
(Tel: +44
(Tel: +44 (0) (0) 1524
1524 593660,
593660, e-mail: e-mail: a.montazeri@lancaster.ac.uk)
a.montazeri@lancaster.ac.uk)
(Tel: +44 (0) 1524 593660, e-mail:
(Tel: +44 (0) 1524 593660, e-mail: a.montazeri@lancaster.ac.uk) a.montazeri@lancaster.ac.uk)
Abstract: In this paper the problem of dynamic modeling and parameter estimation of a seven degree of
Abstract: In this paper the problem of dynamic modeling and parameter estimation of a seven degree of
freedom hydraulic
Abstract: In this
this paper
papermanipulator
the problem
problem is investigated.
of dynamic
dynamic modeling The numerical
modeling and parametermodel isestimation
parameter developedof inaa seven
Simulink using
Abstract:
freedom hydraulic
Abstract: In
In this paper the
manipulator
the problem of
is investigated.
of dynamic The numerical
modeling and
and model isestimation
parameter developedof
estimation of inaa seven
Simulink
seven
degree
degree
degreeusing of
of
Abstract:
SimMechanic
freedom
freedom
In this
and
hydraulic
hydraulic
paper
Simscapethe
manipulator
manipulator
problem
toolboxes
is
is
of dynamic
with
investigated.
investigated.
modeling
unknown/uncertain
The
The
and
numerical
numerical
parameter
parameters.
model
model is
is
estimation
The
developed
developed aimof of
in
in
seven
this
Simulink
Simulink
degree
paper is of
using
using
of
to
SimMechanic
freedom
freedom and Simscape
hydraulic
hydraulic manipulator
manipulator toolboxes
is
is us with unknown/uncertain
investigated.
investigated. The
The numerical
numerical parameters.
model
model is is for The aim in
developed
developed of Simulink
in this paperusing
Simulink is to
using
develop
SimMechanic
SimMechanic a mechanism
and
and that
Simscape
Simscape enables
toolboxes
toolboxes towithfind a feasible
unknown/uncertain set of parameters
parameters. the
The robot
aim of that
this is consistent
paper is to
develop a mechanism
SimMechanic and
and Simscape that enablestoolboxes us towith
withfindunknown/uncertain
a feasible set of parameters parameters. for The aim
the robot of this
that ispaper is
consistent to
SimMechanic
with measurements
develop
develop aa mechanism
mechanism
Simscape
ofthatthe enables
that
toolboxes
input,
enables output,
us
us to
to
with andunknown/uncertain
find
find
unknown/uncertain
aastates
feasible
feasible of theset
set system
of
of
parameters.
parameters.
parameters
parameters under for noisy
for
The
The
the
the
aim
and
robot
robot
of
aimunknown
ofthatthis
thisis
that is
paper
paper is
is to
operating
consistent
consistent
to
with
develop
develop measurements
aa mechanism
mechanism of the
that step
that input,
enables
enables output,
us to
us to findand
find states
aastates of
feasibleisset
feasible the system
setdeveloped
of parameters
of parameters under noisy
for the
for and
theanrobot
robot unknown
thaterror
that operating
is consistent
is consistent
conditions.
with
with measurements
measurements As the first
of the input, a genetic
output, andalgorithm of the system to
under solve
noisy and output
unknown system
operating
conditions.
with
with measurements
measurements As the of of
the
offirst
theastep
the
input,
input,
input, a output,
geneticand
output, and states
states2, of
algorithm of isthe system
thedeveloped
system under
to solve
under noisy
noisy and
an unknown
andoutput
unknown erroroperating
system
operating
identification
conditions.
conditions.
identification As
Asproblem
the
the
problem
for
first
first
for astep
step aa output,
specific
specific
joint, and
genetic
genetic
joint,
i.e. states
joint
algorithm
algorithm
i.e. joint 2,
of
such
suchis
is
the system
that
developed
that the
under
the parameters
developed to
to
parameters
noisy
solve
solve ofan
of
and
the
an
the
unknown
joint
output
output
joint
converge
error
error
converge
operating
to the
system
system
to the
conditions.
conditions.
desired set ofAs
As the first
the
parameters first withinstep aaan genetic
step genetic
acceptable algorithm
algorithm
accuracy. is The
is developed
developed
results canto be
to solve
solve an output
an output error
straightforwardly error
extendedsystem
system to
identification
identification problem
problem for a
forwithin specific joint, i.e. joint 2, such that the parameters of the joint converge to
to the
desired set of problem
identification
identification
all joints of the
parameters
problem
manipulator. for
for aaa specific
specific
specific
joint, i.e.
an acceptable
joint,
joint,
i.e. joint
i.e.
joint
accuracy.
joint
2, such
2,
2,
such
such Thethatresults
that
that
the parameters
the
the
parameters
parameters
of the
can be straightforwardly
of
of
the joint
the
joint converge
joint
converge
extended
converge to
to
the
to
the
the
desired
all jointsset
desired set ofoftheparameters
of parameters
manipulator. within
within an an acceptable
acceptable accuracy. accuracy. The The results
results can can be be straightforwardly
straightforwardly extended extended to to
desired
desired set
set of
of parameters
parameters within
within an an acceptable
acceptable accuracy. accuracy. The The results
results can can be be straightforwardly
straightforwardly extended extended to to
all
all
© joints
Keywords:
joints
2016, IFACof
of the
the manipulator.
Parameter
manipulator.
(International estimation,
Federation System
of Automatic identification,
Control) Nonlinear
Hosting by Elsevier model,Ltd. Genetic
All rights algorithm,
reserved.
all joints
Keywords:
all of
joints of the the manipulator.
Parameter
manipulator. estimation, System identification, Nonlinear model, Genetic algorithm,
MathematicalParameter
Keywords:
Keywords: modeling estimation, System System identification,
identification, Nonlinear Nonlinear model, model, GeneticGenetic algorithm, algorithm,
MathematicalParameter
Keywords:
Keywords: modeling estimation,
Parameter
Parameter estimation,
estimation, System System identification,
identification, Nonlinear Nonlinear model, model, GeneticGenetic algorithm, algorithm,
Mathematical
Mathematical modeling
modeling
Mathematical modeling
Mathematical modeling 

 manufacturing (Mak et al., 2000, Dingwei et al., 2001). From
1. INTRODUCTION manufacturing (Mak et al., 2000, Dingwei et al., 2001). From
 amanufacturing
control perspective,
1. INTRODUCTION
1. INTRODUCTION
manufacturing
amanufacturing
control perspective,
manufacturing
(Mak
(Mak et
(Mak et for
et al., example
al.,
for
al.,
2000,
2000, Dingwei
example
2000,
in the et
Dingwei
in the et
Dingwei etarticle
al.,
article
al.,
by (Kwok
al., 2001).
2001).
by (Kwok
2001).
From
From
From
Industrial robots are1. 1. INTRODUCTION
proven to
INTRODUCTION be an invaluable asset to take a and Sheng,
control 1994) (Mak
perspective, a et al.,
genetic
for 2000,
example Dingwei
algorithm in is
the et al.,
used
article 2001).
toby tune From
(Kwok the
Industrial robots are1.proven to be an invaluable asset to take aaaand
INTRODUCTION control
Sheng,
control
control
parameters
perspective,
1994)
perspective,
perspective,
of a PID
a for example
genetic
for
for
control
example
algorithm
example
system
in the
in
in
on
the
is
the
a
article
used
article
article
6-DOF
tobytune
by
by
robot
(Kwok
(Kwok
(Kwok
arm,
the
a
the place
Industrial
Industrial of
robots
robotshumanare beings
are beings
proven in
proven in many
to many
to be an
be difficult
an difficult
invaluable
invaluable and hazardous
asset
asset take and
to take
to and Sheng,
Sheng, 1994)
1994) aa control
genetic
genetic algorithm
algorithm is
is used
used to
to tune
tune the
the
the place
Industrial
Industrial of
robots
robotshumanare
are proven
proven to
to be
be an
an invaluable
invaluable and hazardous
asset
asset to
to take
take parameters
and
and Sheng,
Sheng, of
1994)
1994)a PID a
a genetic
genetic system
algorithm
algorithm on a 6-DOF
is
is used
used robot
to
to tune
tunearm,the
the a
situations,
the place of such
ofsuch humanas manufacturing
beings in in many
many (Zhang
difficult et. al.,
and 2014)
hazardous and Puma560.
parameters
parameters Their
of
of aa PID
PID resultscontrol
control show
system
system that on
on the genetic
aa 6-DOF
6-DOF robot
robotalgorithm
arm,
arm, aa
the place
situations, humanas beings
manufacturing difficult
(Zhang et. and
al., hazardous
2014) and Puma560.
parameters Their
of a PID resultscontrol show
system that on thea genetic
6-DOF robotalgorithm
arm,
the
the place
nuclear
situations,
of human
placedecommissioning
ofsuch human beings
as manufacturing
manufacturing
in
beings(Bogue, many
in many difficult
difficult
2011).
(Zhang
and
et. and
Working hazardous
hazardous
al., 2014)
2014)in semi- and Puma560. parameters
approach of
isTheir a PID
better forcontrol
results parametersystem
show onthe
optimisation
that a 6-DOF than
genetic robot arm, aa
traditional
algorithm
situations,
nuclear
situations, such
decommissioning
such as
as (Bogue,
manufacturing (Zhang
2011).
(Zhang et.
Working
et. al.,
al., 2014)in semi-and
and Puma560.
approach
Puma560. is Their
better
Their results
for
results show
parameter
show that
that the
optimisation
the genetic
than
genetic algorithm
traditional
algorithm
situations,
structured, such as manufacturing
unstructured, dynamic, (Zhang
and harsh et. al., 2014)
environments and approach Puma560.such
methods is Their
betteras results
trial
for andshow
parameter that
and the
erroroptimisation genetic
empirical algorithm
approaches.
nuclear
nuclear
structured,
nuclear
nuclear
decommissioning
decommissioning
unstructured, dynamic,
decommissioning
decommissioning
(Bogue,
(Bogue,
(Bogue,
(Bogue,
2011).
2011).
and harsh
2011).
2011).
Working
Working
Working
Working
in
in
environments
in
semi-
semi-
semi-
incheaper
semi- methods
approach
methods
approach
approach
is
such better
is(Šitum
is better
better
for
as trial
for and erroroptimisation
for parameter
parameter
parameter and empirical
optimisation
optimisation
than
than
than
than
traditional
traditional
approaches.
traditional
traditional
necessitates
structured, emergence
unstructured, of smarter,
dynamic, and faster,
harsh and
environments Similarly
methods such
such as
as and
trial
trial Ciković,
and
and error
error 2014)
and
and focus
empirical on tuning
approaches. PID
structured,
necessitates
structured,
structured,
industrial
unstructured,
emergence dynamic,
unstructured,
unstructured,
robots with the
of smarter,
dynamic,
dynamic,
capability
and
and
and
of
harsh
harsh environments
faster,
harsh
showing
and cheaper Similarly
environments
environments
human traits methods
methods
gains,
(Šitum
such
such
however asthis
as and
trialtime
trial Ciković,
and for
and error
error
a and empirical
2014)
and
hydraulic
focus on approaches.
empirical
empirical tuning PID
approaches.
approaches.
manipulator and
necessitates
necessitates
industrial robots emergence
emergence of
of
with the capability smarter,
smarter, faster,
faster,
of showing and
and
human cheaper
cheaper
traits gains, Similarly
Similarly however(Šitum
(Šitumthis and
andtime Ciković,
Ciković, 2014)
2014)
for a2014) hydraulic focus on
focusmanipulatortuning
on tuning
tuning PID PID
PID
and
necessitates
necessitates
such as sensing, emergence
emergence
dexterity, of memory
of smarter,
smarter, faster,
faster,
and and
and
trainability. cheaper
cheaper
As a Similarly
Similarly
focussing (Šitum
(Šitum
on one and
andtime
joint Ciković,
Ciković,
rather than2014)the focus
whole on
focusmanipulator
on tuning
arm. The GA PIDis
industrial
industrial
such as robots
robots with
sensing, with
with the capability
the capability
dexterity, capability
memory of showing
ofand
showing human
human As
trainability. traits
traitsa gains, gains,
gains,
focussing however
howeveron one this
this
joint time
ratherfor a
forthan hydraulic
a hydraulic
hydraulic
the whole manipulator
arm. The GA and
andis
industrial
industrial
result of robots
robots
progress with
in the
the
this capability
area, nowadays of
of showing
showing
industrial human
human
robots traits
traits
are gains,
used ashowever
however
part of this
this
the time
time
control for
for a
a
system, hydraulic
generating manipulator
manipulator
PID gains and
and
to
such
such as
result
such as
of
as
sensing,
sensing, in
progress
sensing,
dexterity,
dexterity,
this
dexterity, area, memory
memory
nowadays
memory
and trainability.
andindustrial
and trainability.
trainability.robots Asareaaa focussing
As
As focussing
used
focussingas part on
on of
on
one
onethe
one
joint
joint
joint
rather
control
rather
than
than the
rathersystem,
than the
whole
whole arm.
thegenerating
whole arm.
arm. PID The
The
The
GA
GA to
gains
GA
is
is
is
such
taking
result as
ofonsensing,
more in
progress dexterity,
complicated
in area,memory
this area, jobs such
nowadays andindustrial
trainability.
as picking robots Asandarea used focussing
control as the
part onactuator.
onethe
of joint ratherallows
This
control than the
system, betterwhole
generating arm.
control PID The
during GAthe
gains is
to
result
taking
result of
ofonprogress
more
progress this
complicated
in this area, nowadays
jobs
nowadays suchindustrial
as
industrial robots
picking
robots are
and
are used
control
used as
as part
the
part of
of the
actuator.
the control
This
control system,
allows
system, generating
better
generating control PID
PID gains
during
gains to
the
to
result of
packaging, progresstesting in this
or area, nowadays
inspecting industrial
products, robots
cutting, are
and
picking and control used as
non-linear part
the of
behaviourthe
actuator. control
of
This system,
the generating
hydraulic PID
actuator, gains
whereto
taking
taking
packaging,on more
on more complicated
testingcomplicated
or inspecting jobs products,
jobs such as
such as cutting,
picking control
non-linear
control
control the
the behaviour
actuator.
actuator. of allows
This
This allows
the hydraulic
allows
better
better
better
control
control
actuator,during
during the
the
where
taking
taking
welding,
packaging,
on
onwhichmore
more
testing
complicated
complicated
are all inspecting
or common
inspecting
jobs
jobs such
such as
problems
products, aswith picking
picking
particular
cutting,
and
and
and traditional
non-linear
non-linear
themethods
actuator.
behaviour
behaviour
This
approximate
of
of
allows
the
the the systemcontrol
better
hydraulic
hydraulic
control
as during
during
linear.
actuator,
actuator,
the
the
where
where
packaging,
welding,
packaging, which testing
testingare or
all
or common
inspecting products,
problems
products, withcutting,
particular
cutting, and
and traditional
non-linear methods
behaviour approximate
of the the system
hydraulic as linear.
actuator, where
packaging,
importance
welding, which testing
for are or
automation
all inspecting
common in both products,
problems cutting,
manufacturing
with particular and non-linear methods
traditional behaviour of the the
approximate hydraulic
system actuator,
as linear. where
welding,
importance
welding,
welding,
which
which
which for are
are
are
all
automation
all common
all common
common in both problems
problems
problems
with
manufacturing
with
with facts,
particular
particular
particular and traditionaltraditional
traditional
From a system
methods
methods
approximate
approximate the
methods identification
approximate the
system
systemofas
thepoint
system as linear.
as linear.
linear.
view, genetic
decommissioning
importance
importance for
for applications.
automation
automation in
inConsidering
both
both these
manufacturing
manufacturing two
and
and
decommissioning
importance
importance for
for applications.
automation
automation in
inConsidering
both
both these
manufacturing
manufacturing facts, two
and
and From a system identification point of view, genetic
Hydrolek
decommissioning hydraulicallyapplications. actuated manipulators,
Considering these each
facts, with
two algorithms
From
From a
a are
system
system used by (Grecu
identification
identification et al., 2009,
point
point Jafari
of
of view,
view,et al.,genetic
2007)
genetic
decommissioning
Hydrolek
decommissioning hydraulicallyapplications.
applications. actuated Considering
manipulators,
Considering these facts,
each
these have
facts, been two
with
two From algorithms
From a are
system used by (Grecu
identification et al., 2009,
point Jafari
of view,et al.,genetic
2007)
decommissioning
7DOF
Hydrolek (i.e. six applications.
rotary
hydraulically joints
actuated Considering
and one these
gripper)
manipulators, facts,
each two
with for tuning
algorithms a system
the
are model
used identification
byparameters
(Grecu et of
al.,point
a robot
2009, of arm
Jafariview,
atetthe genetic
al.,design
2007)
Hydrolek
7DOF (i.e. hydraulically
six rotary actuated
joints and manipulators,
one gripper) each been
have with algorithms algorithms
for tuning are model
the
are used by
used byparameters
(Grecu et
(Grecu et ofal.,a2009,
al., 2009,
robot Jafari
arm
Jafari atetthe
et al.,design
al., 2007)
Hydrolek
Hydrolek hydraulically
tohydraulically actuated
actuated manipulators,
manipulators, each
each with with algorithms
stage. They are model
used a by (Grecuserial
et ofal.,a2009, Jafariat al., 2007)
etthe 2007)
attached
7DOF
7DOF (i.e.
attached
7DOF (i.e.
to
(i.e.
asix
a sixBrokk-40
six
rotary
rotary joints
Brokk-40
rotary
mobile
joints
mobile
joints andplatform
and
and
one
one gripper)
platform
one
and developed
gripper)
and
gripper)
have
have been
developed
have been
been
at for
at for tuning
stage.
for tuning
They
tuning theuse
the
the usemodel
model a
3-DOF
parameters
parameters
3-DOF
parameters serial of manipulator
of a robot
robot arm
manipulator
a robot arm at
arm
powered
at the design
powered
the design
design
by
by
7DOF
Lancaster
attached (i.e. six
University
toUniversity rotary for joints
R&D and
in one
relation gripper)
to tasks have
such as been
the
at stage. for tuning
electric They the
motors usemodel and
aaand parameters
3-DOF gearboxes
serial of a asrobot
manipulatoran arm at the
example.
powered design
The
by
attached
Lancaster
attached to
to aaa Brokk-40
Brokk-40
Brokk-40 for mobile
mobile
R&D
mobile in platform
platform
relation
platform to and
and
tasks
and
developed
developed
such
developed as at
the
at stage.
electric
stage. They
They motors use
use a 3-DOF
3-DOF serial
gearboxes
serial manipulator
as
manipulatoran powered
example.
powered by
The
by
attached toUniversity
decommissioning,
Lancaster a Brokk-40repairfor mobile platform
and maintenance
R&D in relation to and
of
tasks developed
nuclear
such plants
as at electric
the stage. They
optimisation motorsisuseon atheand 3-DOF
weight serial
of the manipulator
gearboxes gearbox
as an and powered
link lengths,
example. by
The
Lancaster University
decommissioning,
Lancaster University repairfor
for R&D
and
R&D in relation
maintenance
in relation to
to tasks
of
tasks such
nuclear
such as
plants
as the
the electric
optimisation
electric motors
motorsis on and
the
and gearboxes
weight of
gearboxes the as
gearbox
as an
an andexample.
link
example. The
lengths,
The
Lancaster
(see e.g. University
Bakari
decommissioning, et. al.
repairfor R&D
2007; in
Taylor
andTaylor relation
and
maintenance to tasks
Robertson,
of nuclearsuch
2013).
nuclear as the
plants optimisation electric
with
optimisationthe motors
aimis onof and
the gearboxes
minimising
weight of the as
manufacturing
gearbox an andexample.
cost
link The
whilst
lengths,
decommissioning,
(see e.g. Bakari et. al. repair 2007; and maintenance
and Robertson, of 2013). plants with the aim
optimisation is
is on
onofthethe weight
minimising
weight of
of the gearbox
manufacturing and link
costlengths,
whilst
decommissioning,
decommissioning,
(see e.g. Bakari et.
repair
repair
al. 2007;
and maintenance
andTaylor
maintenance
and
of
of nuclear
Robertson, nuclear
2013).
plants
plants with optimisation
meeting the set
aimisperformance
onof the minimising of the
weightcriteria.the gearbox
gearbox
The main
manufacturing
and
and link
link lengths,
lengths,
difference
cost whilst
(see
(see e.g.
e.g. Bakari
Bakari et.
et. al.
al. 2007;
2007; Taylor
Taylor and
and Robertson,
Robertson, 2013).
2013). with
meeting
with the
the aim
set
aim of
performance
of minimising
minimising manufacturing
criteria. The
manufacturing main cost whilst
difference
cost whilst
(see e.g. Bakari
Designing highet. al.performance
2007; Taylor and controlRobertson, 2013). to between the
algorithms with the aim
work of minimising
carried outcriteria. manufacturing
by (Grecu et al., cost
2009, whilst
Jafari et
Designing high performance control algorithms to meeting meeting
between
meeting
meeting
al., 2007),
the set
set
set
set work
and
performance
performance
carried
performance
performance
what is done
out criteria.
by (Grecu
criteria.
criteria.
in the
The
The
The
The
present
et main
main
al.,
main
main2009,
article,
difference
difference
Jafari
difference
difference
is that
et
the
compensate
Designing
Designing the
high
high dynamicsperformance
performance of this manipulator
control
control requires
algorithms
algorithms the
to
to between
between the
the work
work carried
carried out
out by
by (Grecu
(Grecu et
et al.,
al., 2009,
2009, Jafari
Jafari et
et
compensate
Designing the
high dynamicsperformance of this manipulator
control requires
algorithms the
to between al., 2007),
between the
theandand
work
work what is
carried
carried done out in
by the present
(Grecu et article,
al., 2009, is that
Jafari the
et
Designing
development
compensate high
of techniques
the dynamicsperformance to
of capture
this control
the dynamic
manipulator algorithms
behaviour
requires to
the former
al.,
al., 2007),
2007),were and modelling
what
what is
is atout
done
done
by
thein
in the
the
(Grecu
design stage
present
present
et al., 2009,
whereas
article,
article, is
is
Jafari
here
that
that
et
an
the
the
compensate
development
compensate the
of
the dynamics
techniques
dynamics of
to
of this
capture
this manipulator
the
manipulatordynamic requires
behaviour
requires the
the former
al., 2007),were and modelling
what is at
done thein design
the stage
present whereas
article, is here
that an
the
compensate
of the system the dynamics
accurately, of
and this
to manipulator
estimate requires
parameters of the al., 2007),
existing arm and what
with is
unknown done in
or the present
time-varying article, is
parameters that the
due
development
the systemof
development
of
development
development
of
of
techniques
techniques
ofaccurately,
techniques
techniques
to
to
and
to
capture
capture
to estimate
to capture
capture
the
the
the
dynamic
dynamic
parameters
the dynamic
dynamic of the former
behaviour
behaviour
behaviour
behaviour
former
existing
former
were
age were
former
to
arm modelling
were
were
and
modelling
with unknown
modelling
modelling
use isunknown
at
at
at
the
theordesign
at the
modelled.
design
time-varying
theordesign
design
Hence,
stage
stage
stage
whereas
whereas
parameters
ratherwhereas
stage whereas
than trying
here
here
here
heredue
an
an
due
an
an
to
developed
of
of the
the system
system model under different
accurately,
accurately, and
and to
to operating
estimate
estimate conditions.
parameters
parameters of
of The
the
the existing
existing arm
arm with
with unknown or time-varying
time-varying parameters
parameters due
developed
of
of the
the system
system model under
accurately,
accurately, different
and
and to
to operating
estimate
estimate conditions.
parameters
parameters of
of The
the
the to age
existing
existing and
arm
arm usewith
with is modelled.
unknown
unknown or
or Hence,
time-varying
time-varying rather than
parameters
parameterstrying to
due
due
importance
developed of
model this
under problem in the
differentin operating
operating robotic context
conditions. The is tooptimise
to age
age the
and
and manipulator
use
use is
is design,
modelled.
modelled. it
Hence,
Hence, is attempted
rather
rather than
thanto match
trying
trying the
to
to
developed
importance
developed model
of
model under
this
under different
problem
different the
operating roboticconditions.
context
conditions. The
The is optimise
to age the
and manipulator
use is design,
modelled. it
Hence, is attempted
rather thanto match
trying the
to
developed
investigated
importance model
ofin thisunder
(Swevers
this different
problem et al.,in operating
1996).
the To
roboticconditions.
address
context The
this
is to age and
measured
optimise the use
system isperformance.
manipulator modelled.
design, Hence,
Theit is rather than
fundamental
attempted to trying the
reason
match to
for
importance
investigated
importance of
ofin (Swevers
this problem
problem et in
al.,
in the
1996).
the robotic
To
robotic context
address
context is
this
is optimise
measured
optimise the
the manipulator
system
manipulatorperformance. design,
design, Theit
it is
is attempted
fundamental
attempted to
to match
reason
match the
for
the
importanceandof
nonlinear
investigated in this
non-convex
(Swevers problem problem,
et in 1996).
al., the
in robotic
this article
To context
a
address Genetic is measured
this optimise the
utilizing a GA manipulator
system as a
performance. design,optimisation
nonlinear Theit isfundamental
attempted tool, to reason
match
is that the
we
for
investigated
nonlinear andin (Swevers et al., 1996).
in this To address this measured
utilizing a system
GA as performance. The
a nonlinear optimisation fundamental tool, reason
is that forwe
investigated
investigated
Algorithm
nonlinear (GA)
and innon-convex
in (Swevers
(Swevers problem,
is utilised.problem,
non-convex
et
etGAsal.,
al.,are1996).
1996).
inpowerful
this
article
To
To
article
a Genetic
address
address
global search
aa Genetic
this
this utilizing measured
measured
already have system
aa system
GA
performance.
performance.
a potentially
as aa nonlinear
The
The
usefuloptimisation
nonlinearfundamental
fundamental
mechanistic
tool,
reason
reason
is
for
for
model
that we
nonlinear
Algorithm and
(GA) non-convex
is utilised. problem,
GAs are in this
powerful articleglobal Genetic
search utilizing
already
utilizing have GA a as
potentially nonlinear
useful optimisation
nonlinear tool,
mechanistic is that
that we
model
nonlinear
nonlinear
optimization
Algorithm
andalgorithms
and
(GA)
non-convex
non-convex
is
problem,
andproblem,
utilised. have are
GAs been in used
in this article
this
powerful
article
to global
solve aa Genetic
Genetic
various
search utilizing
for
alreadythe armhaveaa GA
GA
but ashas
itas
aa potentiallyaa unknown
nonlinear parameters.
nonlinear
useful
optimisation tool,
optimisation
nonlinear
tool, is
mechanistic
is that we
we
model
Algorithm
optimization
Algorithm (GA)
(GA) is
algorithms
is utilised.
and
utilised. GAs
have
GAs are
been
are powerful
used
powerful to global
solve
global search
various
search already
for the
already have
arm
have buta potentially
it has
potentially unknownuseful
useful nonlinear
parameters.
nonlinear mechanistic
mechanistic model
model
Algorithm
problems (GA)
in control is utilised.
and andsystem GAs are powerful
identification global search already have a potentially useful nonlinear mechanistic model
optimization
optimization
problems algorithms
algorithms
in control and andsystem have
have been
been
identificationused
used to(Nguyen
to solve
solve
(Nguyen
et al., for
various
various
et al., Another for
for
the
the arm
arm but but it
it has
has unknown
unknown parameters.
parameters.
optimization
optimization
2014,
problemsKristinsson
in
algorithms
algorithms
control and and
and
and
Dumont,
system
have
have
1992, been
been used
used to
Chang,
identification to solve
solve
2007)
(Nguyen
various
various
including
et al., for the
the arm
arm areabut
but in it
it has
haswhich unknown
unknown GAs parameters.
parameters.
have found their way into
problems
2014,
problems in control
Kristinsson
in control and and
and system1992,
Dumont,
system identification
Chang,
identification (Nguyen
2007)
(Nguyen et al.,
including
et al., Another area in which GAs have found their way into
problems
robotics in
(Yanrongcontrol and
and system
Yang, identification
2004, Nearchou, (Nguyen
1998) et al.,
and robotics is for path planning. For instance, (Albert et into
al.,
2014,
2014, Kristinsson
robotics
2014,
2014, (Yanrongand
Kristinsson
Kristinsson
Kristinsson
and
and
and and Dumont,
Yang, 1992,
Dumont,
Dumont,
Dumont, 2004, Chang,
1992,
1992,
1992,
Chang,
Nearchou,
Chang,
Chang,
2007)
2007)1998)
2007)
2007)
including
including
including
including and Another Another
robotics
Another
Another isarea
area
area
areafor in in
in
inpath which
which
which
which
GAs
GAs
planning.
GAs
GAs
have
have
For
have
have
found
found
instance,
found
found
their
their
(Albert
their
their
way
way
way
way et into
al.,
into
into
robotics (Yanrong
robotics (Yanrong and and Yang,
Yang, 2004, 2004, Nearchou,
Nearchou, 1998) 1998) and and robotics robotics is
is for
for path
path planning.
planning. For
For instance,
instance, (Albert
(Albert et
et al.,
al.,
robotics
robotics ©
Copyright (Yanrong
(Yanrong and Yang, 2004, Nearchou, 1998) and robotics
2016 IFACand Yang, 2004, Nearchou, 1998) and1261robotics is for path planning. For instance, (Albert et al.,
is for path planning. For instance, (Albert et al.,
Copyright 2016 IFAC
2405-8963 © 2016, 1261Hosting by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
IFAC (International Federation of Automatic Control)
Copyright
Peer review©
Copyright © 2016
2016
under IFAC
IFAC
responsibility 1261
1261
of International Federation of Automatic Control.
Copyright
Copyright © 2016 IFAC
© 2016 IFAC 1261
1261
10.1016/j.ifacol.2016.07.688
IFAC MIM 2016
1262
June 28-30, 2016. Troyes, France C. West et al. / IFAC-PapersOnLine 49-12 (2016) 1261–1266

2009) used a GA for path planning of a 3-DOF planar

manipulator. Given a current and target position, the GA was
used to find a path that minimises joint angle change whilst
avoiding objects. Another area of robotics where GAs are
used is for solving the inverse kinematics problem
(Nearchou, 1998). This shows the range of tasks in which a
GA can be used within robotics.

Nonetheless, there appears to be relatively few articles

looking at applying GAs to hydraulic robot manipulators.
One paper that does look at hydraulic manipulators is
(Rouvinen and Handroos, 1997), where a 3-DOF log crane
Fig. 1. High level description of 7-DOF hydraulically
with a reach of over six and a half meters is investigated.
actuated tele-operated robot manipulator (Montazeri and
The aim of this paper was to use GAs in conjunction with
Ekotuyo, 2016).
neural networks to compensate for the deflection of the links,
and to improve accuracy in reaching a target position.
for the MATLAB Simulink environment and, in the final
Another paper that investigates hydraulic manipulators is
version of the model, will comprise all the mechanical,
(Šitum and Ciković, 2014) mentioned above, where a genetic
electrical, and hydraulic parameters of the manipulator.
algorithm was used to tune the PID gains to control a single
Details of the modelling equations for each block in Fig. 1
hydraulic cylinder. GAs were used to tune the gains due to
are explained in (Montazeri and Ekotuyo, 2016, and Antoine,
the difficulty in modelling the non-linear electro hydraulic
2014) but are omitted here for brevity and because the focus
system.
of the present article is on the implementation of the GA for
parameter estimation. Unfortunately, due to the age of the
The aim of present research is to use a GA to estimate
arms, data sheets containing values for many parameters are
parameter values for a hydraulic manipulator, i.e. the
unavailable, and certain parameters may have changed over
HydroLek manipulator, to support the development of control
time. Because of this it is intended to develop a mechanism
systems for nuclear decommissioning and manufacturing
using GAs that enables us to estimate and update certain
applications. The main problem in working with this robot is
parameter values of the model any time they are needed. As
that the actual values of the parameters of the manipulator are
the starting point the focus is on one joint, with concentration
either unknown or may have changed through time from
on the mechanical parameters of the arm. Lacking data sheets
when the manipulator was first developed. The main
stating the mass of the individual links, the overall mass of
contribution of the paper is design of a genetic algorithm with
the arm and some guess work was used to define the starting
the capability of estimating its parameters using an output
values of link masses.
error system identification framework for the developed
mechanistic model (Montazeri and Udo, 2016) of the
The same problem applies for the spring stiffness and
HydroLek arm. It is expected to have not only a close match
damping coefficient of the joint. By subsequently using the
between the output response of the model and that of the real
estimated mass for each link, the inertia can be calculated
arm but also to achieve a set of parameters which are close to
based on the geometry of the link, which is known from the
their ‘true’ values.
CAD model of the arm. All of these nine parameters are
2. DYNAMIC MODEL OF THE MANIPULATOR included in the process of the GA to be estimated with
sufficient accuracy. The proposed genetic algorithm is
Different subsystems of the 7-DOF hydraulically actuated developed and explained in the next section.
tele-operated robotic manipulator, i.e. the Hydrolek arm, are
shown in the schematic block diagram of Fig. 1. Due to 3. THE PROPOSED GENETIC ALGORITHM
complexity in dynamic modelling of such a non-linear
GA is a heuristic global optimisation method based on the
system, the aim is to develop a reliable simulator by which
biological principal of natural selection, where the strongest
the dynamic and kinematic characteristics of the arm can be
individuals will survive and reproduce. In the GA the
derived. This is essential for the design and implementation
individual parameters are encoded as strings of numbers
of different joint-level and supervisory control algorithms to
called chromosomes, so for example one chromosome will
accomplish difficult decommissioning or manufacturing
contain a value for each of the parameters being investigated.
tasks, such as remote pick and place, cutting, and welding
The process starts by creating a random population of
autonomously. The approach adopted here is to investigate
potential solutions; these are then evaluated using a fitness
the modelling of various components of the manipulator
function. A weighted roulette wheel selection method is then
using numerical and experimental techniques, and then to
used to find the strongest members of that population to pass
integrate them in a unified Simulink model for the purpose of
them through to the next stage, crossover. The crossover
system identification, parameter estimation, and the design of
stage selects two random parent chromosomes and combines
end effector trajectories, as well as the wider control
them to form two child chromosomes, for example, by
objectives. This process is usually referred to as Robot
combining the front half of one parent with the end half of
Calibration in robotic terminology. The model is developed
the other parent. Mutation is the final stage, where single
elements may be randomly swapped to create a more diverse

1262
 IFAC MIM 2016
June 28-30, 2016. Troyes, France C. West et al. / IFAC-PapersOnLine 49-12 (2016) 1261–1266 1263

population. The process then starts again with the new
population, and repeats until either a minimum fit is reached
or a specific number of iterations are passed. Figure 2
(Montazeri et. al. 2003, Montazeri and Poshtan 2009) shows
the flow chart of the GA adopted for the present optimization
purpose. In the sequel, each block in Fig. 1 will be explained
and expanded in more detail, to tailor the algorithm to the
specific problem at hand. Two different coding schemes are
investigated, integer and multi variable binary string
(MVBS), to find which gives the best performance in
converging to a global minimum solution. Using either
coding scheme, the chromosomes themselves look the same,
as shown in (1),
���������� � �K D S M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6� �1� � � 2 ��������� ����
where K is the gain representing the whole block of the
electro hydraulic actuator, D is the joint damping coefficient,
S is the joint spring stiffness and M1 to M6 are the link
masses. In the MVBS scheme, each element of the
chromosome is represented by a 16 bit binary number,
whereas in the integer coding scheme each element is
represented by an integer.
The next step is to integrate the GA code with the Simulink
model of the system. For each iteration of the algorithm, the
Simulink model is run with the parameters in that
chromosome and the output is compared to measured
experimental data using a fitness function, to generate a value
of fit for that chromosome. This fit value is used to assess the
strength of the chromosome. The fitness value is determined
by comparing the result of running the Simulink model with
each chromosome of parameters in that iteration against
experimental data for the joint. The closer the simulation
output is to the experimental data the smaller the fit value.
As will be investigated later, selection of the fitness function
plays an important role in the convergence behaviour of the
proposed GA. A particular form of the fitness function
converts the GA to a suitable algorithm for the estimation of
parameters of a nonlinear model, while other selection of
fitness function ensures the GA performs well for output
error system identification purposes. Six different fitness
functions were evaluated to find the one with the best
performance, three taking the form of (2) and three as shown
by equation (3):
������� �� (2)
��� � �
����������������� ����� ��
��� � �������� �� (3)
where the error is generated by comparing the simulation and
experimental data as follows:
� � ���������� ���� � ������������ ����
Here α defines the norm type and takes the following values:
�� � � 1 ��� ���� �� ������� ����
� � ��������� ��� ����
Both the experimental data and the simulation are sampled at
0.01 second intervals, and each point of the simulation data is
compared against the corresponding point in the simulating
data to find the difference between the two.
4. RESULTS
4.1 Training phase of the algorithm
Further to the fitness function and the coding scheme
explained in the previous section, the performance of the
genetic algorithm in finding the best estimation for
parameters of the developed model is heavily influenced by
several other factors, namely, crossover rate, crossover type,
mutation rate, and population length. With the aim of finding
the best estimate of parameters for the developed nonlinear
model, it is necessary to train the genetic algorithm and find
the best possible parameters for this specific problem. For
this purpose a specific set of parameters shown in the first
row of Table 1 is considered for the Simulink model to
generate the simulation data suitable for this part. The reason
for this is that it allows us to look at the estimated value of
the parameters outputted by the GA and see how close they
are to the real values already set in the Simulink model. It
also makes clear under which circumstances the algorithm
has the capability to converge to the real values of the
parameter, rather than getting stuck in a different global
minimum point. This happens when the fitness value would
be low but the estimated parameters are a long way off from
the value of the real parameters. Initially, the algorithm is run
by just looking at the gain, spring stiffness, damping
coefficients, and mass for each link. The inertia of each link
is calculated by the SimMechanics blocks that model the
individual link. The parameters of the model are initialized
to randomly chosen values, as shown in the second row of
Table 1.
Table 1 – Initial versus true value of parameters of the model.
Mass of link (kg)
Parameters

Damping

Stiffness

yes 
1 2 3 4 5 6
Gain

Tru. 0.2 231.8 53.4 4.6 5.1 22.5 1.6 4.1 4.7
Fig. 2. Flowchart showing genetic algorithm process. Init. 0.1 100 20 0.6 1.3 2.8 1.2 2.2 1.7

1263
IFAC MIM 2016
1264
June 28-30, 2016. Troyes, France C. West et al. / IFAC-PapersOnLine 49-12 (2016) 1261–1266

the number of iterations the GA requires converging for each

4.2 Evaluation of different coding schemes
Within the GA, the chromosomes are coded in some way
before being passed to crossover and mutation operations,
then decoded later to get back to the actual parameter values.
The coding takes the GA between the two spaces it works in:
the genotype coding space and the phenotype solution space.
In the phenotype space each chromosome contains a value for
each parameter within that chromosome, in genotype space
each chromosome is represented in some way depending on
the coding scheme.
Here, the performance of the algorithm for integer and multi
variable binary coding schemes is investigated. As can be
seen from Fig. 3 the MVBS coding scheme produces more
varied results with the capability to converge to a better value
of the fitness function for the developed model. Therefore
this coding scheme will be used later to solve the practical
problem.
4.3 Evaluation of different crossover types
In development of the algorithm, two different methods of
performing crossover are investigated: pointwise and uniform
crossover. For the pointwise crossover scheme, chromosomes
fitness function. Table 2 compares the relative error of the
estimated parameters for each fitness function. The sum of
these errors listed in the third column of Table 3 is considered
as a measure for determining the suitability of a specific
fitness function for parameter estimation. Table 3 shows the
parameter values corresponding to the plots in Fig. 6. This
result confirms that convergence of the estimated parameters
to the true values needs particular attention in the
development of the GA algorithm. Because different fitness
functions result in different numerical outputs, it is not
possible to compare the learning curves of the GA for
different fitness functions in one plot. To solve this problem,
all the learning curves are normalized between 0 and 1. The
results plotted in Fig. 7 show that norm two (the Euclidian
norm) reaches the final fitness value the soonest, with the
infinity norm (the max norm) taking the longest to reach its
final value.
Table 2. Relative percentage error of estimated parameters for each fitness
function.
Mass of link (kg)

Damping
Function

Stiffness
1 2 3 4 5 6
Fitness

are broken into several segments and each iteration two Gain
parent chromosomes swap segments between the
segmentation points. Uniform crossover works by swapping 1 50 26.0 42.5 19.6 5.9 43.1 12.5 22.0 106.4
2 100 82.6 43.1 84.8 94.1 96.4 250.0 146.3 72.3
every other gene of one of the parent chromosomes with the 3 50 57.9 29.4 23.9 9.8 84.0 93.8 19.5 21.3
other parent, so each child ends up with 50 percent of each 4 50 32.5 47.6 23.9 80.4 78.2 393.8 24.4 12.8
parent chromosome. The results of running the GA for these Key: Fit as in equation (3) 1.Norm inf. (no den) 2. Norm one 3. Norm two.
two different crossover types are compared in Fig. 4. In Fit as in equation (2) 4. Norm inf. with denominator.
execution of the algorithm all other parameters are set Table 3. Comparison of output and parameters error for each fitness function
according to Table 4. As shown by Fig. 4, the difference shown on the plot in Fig. 6.
between the two methods for estimation of parameters of the Fitness Function Lowest fitness
value
Output error index Parameters
error index
model is considerable, with the pointwise method being Norm inf no den. -0.6458 0.645 327
much better for this problem. Norm inf with den.
Norm one no den.
-0.1275
-836.54
0.651
0.85
743
969
Norm two no den. -14.5172 0.82 389
4.4 Evaluation of different crossover rates
The result of running the GA for different crossover values
while the other parameters are set according to Table 4 is
shown in Fig. 5. As can be seen from Fig. 5, the crossover
rate has considerable effect on the speed of convergence of
the genetic algorithm. A crossover value of 1 means that at
every iteration all the parent chromosomes will create new
child chromosomes, so every iteration will contain different
chromosomes to the one before. Crossover values of 0.6 and
0.8 take almost the same time to converge and, despite 0.8
having a higher initial value of fitness, it converges to the
lowest value, suggesting that a crossover value of 0.8 gives
the best performance in this particular case. In fact, with this Fig. 3. Comparison of binary and integer coding schemes.
crossover value, the best compromise is to keep a balance
between the diversity of populations and the need to force the
output to determine the fittest individuals.
4.5 Evaluation of different fitness functions
One of the most important factors in the development of any
GA for the specific problem at hand, is selection of the
suitable fitness function to discriminate the individuals
properly. Different fitness functions considered here are
given in equations (2) and (3). The results of running the GA
for these fitness functions are shown in Fig. 6, while Fig. 7
shows a zoomed in section of Fig. 6 and shows more clearly
Fig. 4. Comparison of pointwise and uniform crossover methods.

1264
 IFAC MIM 2016
June 28-30, 2016. Troyes, France C. West et al. / IFAC-PapersOnLine 49-12 (2016) 1261–1266 1265

best performance for the GA. Figure 8 shows the final output
after running the GA with these conditions. The proposed GA
adapts the parameters of the model in an output error
identification framework, while keeping the estimated model
parameters close to the true parameters chosen for the model.
As the plot in Fig. 8 shows, the estimated model output tracks
the simulation output reasonably well, but tends to overshoot
at the peaks. As can be seen from Table 5 and Fig. 8,
choosing the fitness function as the relative infinity norm of
the error, leads to an algorithm with the capability to estimate
the parameters of the model in a reasonable proximity to the
Fig. 5. Plot showing the effect of different crossover rates on the parameters used to generate the simulation data, in
elite fitness value for 200 iterations. comparison to the other fitness functions. However, further
work is required to improve the estimation accuracy of the
proposed algorithm.
Table 4. The final value of the parameters used for the proposed
GA.
Parameter Value
Coding scheme Multivariable binary coding
Crossover rate (Pc) 0.8
Mutation rate (Pm) 0.05
Parent selection proportional
Crossover type pointwise
Population size 70
Fitness function infinity norm
Fig 6. Plot showing the effect of different fitness functions on the
elite fitness value.

Fig 8. Comparison of the output of the dynamic model for true and
estimated parameters.
Fig 7. Zoomed in section of Fig. 6 comparing the convergence rates
of the algorithms. Table 5. Estimated output versus true parameter values of the model.

The first column of Table 3 compares the absolute value of Mass of link (kg)
Parameter

Damping

Stiffness

the fitness functions after convergence of the GAs. Although

norm two has the fastest convergence rate, it is evident from 1 2 3 4 5 6
Gain

this column that it has a relatively high fitness value, whereas

the infinity norm with the slowest convergence rate has a Est. 0.03 93 99.9 9.2 20 5.9 9.6 15.54 1.2
0.02 48 87.4 5.8 12.7 6.9 7.75 8.31 4.2
very low fitness value. The capability of different fitness Tru

functions to find the best solution, in terms reaching the

minimum output identification error and parameter
estimation error, are compared in the second and third
columns. The second column of Table 3 compares the
infinity norm of the output identification error for each norm,
while third column lists the sum of relative estimation errors
for different norms. As can be seen from Table 3, the infinity
norm without denominator results in both the lowest output
identification error and the parameters estimation error
suggesting that it performs the best in this case.
4.6 Final tune of the proposed algorithm
From the results achieved in the previous sections, it can be
concluded that using the values in Table 4 should give the
5. CONCLUSIONS
In this paper, the problem of dynamic modelling and
parameter estimation of a 7-DOF robot manipulator, i.e. the
HydroLek arm, is investigated. Due to the complexity of the
dynamic behaviour of the system, a mechanistic model using
Simulink is developed. However, the parameters of the model
are subject to change because of device aging and time-
varying characteristics of different operating conditions. To
overcome this problem for the purpose of future simulation
and controller design work, this article has exploited and
refined a genetic algorithm to estimate the parameters of the
model using an output identification framework. This is
accomplished in two steps. In the first step, the parameters of

1265
IFAC MIM 2016
1266
June 28-30, 2016. Troyes, France C. West et al. / IFAC-PapersOnLine 49-12 (2016) 1261–1266
the GA, i.e. coding scheme, crossover type, crossover rate,
mutation rate and fitness function, are all tuned on the basis
of simulation data. The results show that the developed GA
has the capability to estimate the parameters of the dynamic
model with a reasonable accuracy and the output of the
model follows the simulated output closely. In the second
step, the proposed GA is utilized to estimate the parameters
of the model based on measured experimental data. The
developed model will be used for simulation and model based
controller design, and this will be reported in future articles.
REFERENCES
Albert, F., Koh, S., Chen, C., Tiong, S., Edwin, S., (2009).
Optimizing Joint Angles of Robotic Manipulator using
genetic Algorithm. Proceedings of International Conference
on Computer Engineering and Applications (ICCEA 2009),
pp. 134-139, Singapore.
Antonie, M. (2014). Dynamic modelling and parameter
estimation of a hydraulic actuated manipulator. Master
thesis, Lancaster University.
Bakari, M.J., Zeid, K.M., Seward, D.W. (2007).
Development of a Multi-arm mobile Robot for Nuclear
Decommissioning Tasks. International Journal of Advanced
Robotics Systems, vol. 4, pp. 384-406.
Bogue, R. (2011). Robots in the Nuclear Industry: a Review
of Technologies and Applications, International Journal of
Industrial Robot, vol. 38, pp. 113-118.
Chang, W.-D. (2007). Nonlinear system identification and
control using a real-coded genetic algorithm. Applied
Mathematical Modelling, vol. 31, pp. 541-550.
Dingwei, W., Yung, K. L., IP, W. H. (2001). A heuristic
genetic algorithm for subcontractor selection in a global
manufacturing environment. IEEE Transactions on Systems,
Man, and Cybernetics, Part C: Applications and Reviews,
vol. 31, pp. 189-198.
Grecu, V., Grecu, L., Demian, G., Demian, M., Mastorakis,
N., Martin, O. (2009). A Genetic Algorithm for Optimization
in Conceptual Robot Manipulator. WSEAS International
Conference. On Mathematics and Computers in Science and
Engineering.
Jafari, A., Safavi, M., Fadaei, A. A. (2007). Genetic
Algorithm to Optimum Dynamic Performance of Industrial
Robots in the Conceptual Design Phase. IEEE 10th
International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics (ICORR
2007), pp. 1129-1135.
Kristinssion, K., Dumont, G. (1992). System identification
and control using genetic algorithms. , IEEE Transactions on
Systems, Man and Cybernetics, vol. 22, pp. 1033-1046.
Kwok, D. P., Sheng, F., (1994). Genetic algorithm and
simulated annealing for optimal robot arm PID control. IEEE
World Congress on Computational Intelligence and
Evolutionary Computation, vol. 2, pp. 707-713.
Mak, K. L., Wong, Y. S., Wang, X. X. (2000). An Adaptive
Genetic Algorithm for Manufacturing Cell Formation. The
International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing
Technology, vol. 16, pp. 491-497.
1266
Montazeri A., Udo, E. J. (2016). Development of Dynamic
Model of a 7DOF Hydraulically Actuated Tele-Operated
Robot for Decommissioning Applications. To appear in
Proceeding of IEEE 2016 American Control Conference,
Boston, MA, USA.
Montazeri, A., Poshtan, J., Kahaei, M.H., (2003). Optimal
placement of loudspeakers and microphones in an enclosure
using genetic algorithm. IEEE Conference on Control
Applications, pp 135-139.
Montazeri, A., Poshtan, J. (2009). GA-based optimization of
a MIMO ANC system considering coupling of secondary
sources in a telephone kiosk. Applied Acoustics, vol. 70, pp.
945-953.
Nearchou, A.C. (1998). Solving the inverse kinematics
problem of redundant robots operating in complex
environments via a modified genetic algorithm. Mechanism
and Machine Theory, vol. 33, pp. 273-292.
Nguyen, A.-T., Reiter, S., Rigo, P. (2014). A review on
simulation-based optimization methods applied to building
performance analysis. Applied Energy, vol. 113, pp. 1043-
1058.
Rouvinen, A., Handroos, H. (1997). Robot positioning of a
flexible hydraulic manipulator utilizing genetic algorithm and
neural networks. 4th Annual Conference on Mechatronics
and Machine Vision, pp. 182-187.
Situm, Z., Cikovic, Z. (2014). Optimization of control
parameters for servo hydraulic systems using genetic
algorithms. Hidravlika–Regulacija, vol. 3, pp. 198-203.
Swevers, J., Ganseman, C., De Schutter, J., Van Brussel, H.
(1996). Experimental Robot Identification Using Optimised
Periodic Trajectories. Mechanical Systems and Signal
Processing, vol. 10, pp. 561-577.
Taylor, C.J. and Robertson, D. (2013). State-dependent
control of a hydraulically-actuated nuclear decommissioning
robot, Control Engineering Practice, 21, 12, pp.1716-1725.
Yanrong, H., Yang, S.X. (2004). A knowledge based genetic
algorithm for path planning of a mobile robot. Proceedings
on IEEE International Conference on Robotics and
Automation, vol. 5, pp. 4350-4355.
Zhang, G.Q., Li, X., Boca, R., Newkirk, J., Zhang, B.,
Fuhlbrigge, T.A. (2014). Use of Industrial Robots in Additive
Manufacturing– A Survey and Feasibility Study, 41st
International Symposium on Robotics, pp. 1-6, Munich,
Germany.