COLLEGE OF Electrical and Mechanical Engineering

DEPARTMENT OF ELECTRICAL AND COMPUTER

ENGINEERING
Computer Engineering Stream
Course: Robotics

Group Members
No Name ID
1 Henok Belachew ETS 0348/12
2 Eden Getachew ETS 0982/12
3 Bethlehem Tekabe ETS 0143/12
4 Henok Girma ETS 0346/12
5 Hiwot Mastewal ETS 0358/12

Instructor: Mr. Mewael Mizan. (MSc)

1
Table of Contents
Chapter one..................................................................................................................................... .1
1. Introduction............................................................................................................................. .1
1.2. Objectives.............................................................................................................................. .2
1.2.1. General objectives......................................................................................................... .2
1.2.2 Specific objectives.......................................................................................................... .2
Chapter two..................................................................................................................................... .2
2. Literature Review......................................................................................................................2
Chapter three....................................................................................................................................4
3. Mathematical modeling of robotic arm.................................................................................4
3.1. Forward kinematics...............................................................................................................4
3.2. Inverse Kinematics............................................................................................................... .4
3.3. Dynamic Analysis...................................................................................................................4
Reference......................................................................................................................................... .5

1
Chapter one

1. Introduction

In today's technological era, robots are extensively employed across various industries, offering
significant benefits such as cost and time efficiency in production processes. These versatile
machines also prove invaluable in hazardous environments inaccessible to humans. Beyond
industrial settings, robots have found their way into household applications. Moreover, their
adoption is justified by factors like cost-effectiveness. With their ability to deliver heightened
precision and efficiency, robots outperform human labor, ensuring enhanced production output
within shorter time frames.

Robots also play a crucial role in executing medical procedures that demand a level of precision
beyond human capability. Within the medical realm, there are robotic systems designed to conduct
surgeries, albeit under the supervision of a surgeon to ensure meticulous control over the
procedure. Additionally, in industrial settings, robots contribute to mitigating accident risks,
particularly in hazardous work environments where human workers face heightened danger. By
assuming tasks in these risky areas, robots effectively reduce the likelihood of workplace
accidents.

The question we are given contains RPR and the concept behind robots employing an RPR
(prismatic-revolute-prismatic) configuration involves leveraging the advantages offered by each
type of joint to achieve specific functionalities and capabilities.

1. Prismatic Joint: The prismatic joint allows linear motion along a single axis. In the RPR
robot, the second link which provides the robot with the ability to extend or retract in a
linear fashion. This feature is particularly useful for tasks requiring precise positioning or
reaching into confined spaces.

2. Revolute Joint: The revolute joint facilitates rotational motion around a fixed axis. In this
RPR robot, the first revolute joint is the joint at the base, providing the other links with the
ability to pivot or rotate. This rotational flexibility enables the robot to maneuver and orient
itself effectively to perform various tasks.

1
 3. Revolute(Second): The last joint, the revolute joint in the RPR configuration serves as an
rotary for the end effector. It enables the end effector to rotate and grab objects with
different dimensions and shapes.

1.2. Objectives
1.2.1. General objectives
 To gain a comprehensive understanding of forward kinematics, inverse kinematics, and
dynamics.
1.2.2 Specific objectives
 Modeling kinematics and dynamics: Create a mathematical representation for arm
motion and dynamics using Denavit-Hartenberg parameters and Lagrangian mechanics.

Chapter two

2. Literature Review

In the process outlined by Emerich (2007) for designing articulated robots, the initial steps involve
developing both forward and inverse kinematics equations to determine the motion characteristics.
These equations serve as the foundation for constructing the robot's geometry and calculating the
necessary torque, which guides the selection of appropriate motors. Additionally, the methodology
involves testing various link lengths to optimize the robot's reach, a process facilitated by tools like
Matlab's robotic toolbox and manual calculations. Attention to torque considerations influences the
final choice of link lengths and, consequently, motor selection. Furthermore, insights from
Mohamad (2008) advocate for leveraging ant behavior algorithms in path planning for enhanced
efficiency. Specifically, the F-Ant algorithm is recommended for generating paths from the robot's
current position to the desired goal area, employing a unidirectional search approach while
incorporating edge collision detection mechanisms. Despite the time-consuming nature of
complete path planning algorithms, the emergence of techniques like Probabilistic RoadMap
(PRM) planners, as highlighted by Muhamad (2008) and Rubio (2012), offers efficient solutions
that are relatively easier to implement.

Rubio (2012) and Muhamad (2008) propose a dynamic model integration approach for articulated
robot arms, which encompasses dynamic models of the structure, sensors, and actuators. While
2
traditional applications often focus solely on the structure's dynamic model, neglecting the
contributions of sensors and actuators, this comprehensive method promises greater accuracy in
robot control. The authors advocate for validating this approach through simulation experiments,
comparing results with real-world outcomes to affirm its efficacy. This holistic modeling strategy
aims to provide a more accurate representation of the articulated robot's behavior, acknowledging
the interconnectedness of its structural, sensory, and actuation components for improved control
and performance.

The project draws inspiration from various seminal works in the field of articulated robotics to
build and control an articulated robot system. Pieper (1968) provides insights into kinematic
analysis and path planning for computer-controlled manipulators, emphasizing the importance of
storing successful paths in memory to expedite computational processes during path planning.
Additionally, the necessity of six degrees of freedom for grasping objects at arbitrary positions and
orientations is underscored. Hobarth (2008) contributes by exploring a hybrid articulated robot
with flexible links and joints, deriving partial differential equations for dynamic modeling, which
enriches the understanding of complex robotic systems.

Paul (1972) delineates a comprehensive approach to arm control, dividing it into modeling,
trajectory calculation, servoing, and control sections. This structured methodology is mirrored in
the project's design and control process, where parameters from modeling, generation of arm path
trajectories, and servo gravity loading compensation are integrated into the computerized control
of the robotic arm. Furthermore, insights from Atkeson, An, and Hollerbach (1986) inform the
estimation of mass and inertia parameters using Newton-Euler equations and joint torque sensing,
although the project primarily relies on traditional methods. Following the assembly of the robot,
focus shifts to PID loop tuning for motor control, with an emphasis on point-to-point inverse
kinematic control rather than extensive path planning and trajectory generation.

Existing Methodologies: Existing methodologies for forward kinematics, inverse kinematics, and
dynamics analysis in RPR robot systems encompass a variety of techniques and approaches. These
include:

3
 Geometric algorithms and transformation matrices for forward kinematics.
 Closed-form solutions, numerical optimization, and iterative algorithms for inverse
kinematics.
 Lagrangian mechanics, dynamic simulations, and numerical methods for dynamics
analysis.
 Utilization of software tools and simulation platforms for practical implementation and
optimization.

4
Reference
Introduction to Robotics: Analysis, Control, Applications, 3rd Edition by Saeed B. Niku