1 / 43

Control and Representation Vijay Kumar University of Pennsylvania

A M M W O R K S H O P. Control and Representation Vijay Kumar University of Pennsylvania. John Hollerbach Oussama Khatib Vijay Kumar Al Rizzi Daniela Rus. NSF/NASA AMM Workshop March 10-11, 2005 Houston. Outline. State-of-art Historical perspective (nostalgic memories)

damian
Download Presentation

Control and Representation Vijay Kumar University of Pennsylvania

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. A M M W O R K S H O P Control and RepresentationVijay KumarUniversity of Pennsylvania • John Hollerbach • Oussama Khatib • Vijay Kumar • Al Rizzi • Daniela Rus NSF/NASA AMM Workshop March 10-11, 2005 Houston.

  2. Outline • State-of-art • Historical perspective (nostalgic memories) • Accomplishments in robot control • Summary of last 21 years (WTEC study) • Recent, specific contributions (somewhat biased) • Challenges • Panelists • Discussion • What are the intellectual problem areas we should address? Infrastructure? Can we can rally around these?

  3. Mobility & Manipulation 1961 Unimate Historical Perspective • 40+ years of industrial robotics • >20 years of robotics as an academic discipline • ~13 years of mobile manipulation General Motors 40 years of industrial robotics Rus Sarcos ARC Hollerbach

  4. The Real Agenda for AMM • Haptics • John Hollerbach • Humanoids • Oussama Khatib • Perception/Action • Al Rizzi • Distributed/Modular • Daniela Rus • Mobility • Unstructured environments • Manipulation • Physical interaction with the environment • Closely coupled perception/action • Not physically grounded • Dynamics is important • Autonomy • Teleoperation (and therefore haptics) • Supervised Autonomy • Autonomy

  5. WSJ, 3/7 “…teleoperation with time delays is a vexing problem in robotics…” “…because of the lag, it’s inevitable that the human operator will make tiny errors - errors that will in turn cascade into much bigger ones…” Robotics in the news this week

  6. Literature • Domain • ~8-10% manipulation • ~3-4% grasping • ~30-35% mobility Remaining are on medical, manufacturing, industrial, sensor or “methodology” • Control/representation • Model based (~15%) • Data driven approaches (~5%) Counted papers relevant to manipulation and mobility Disclaimer: This is not a scientific study! Conferences surveyed: ICRA 1984-86, 1998-2004

  7. (40%) (4%) (40%) (3 %) Literature (Compared to 1984) • Domain • ~10% manipulation • ~4% grasping • ~35% mobility Remaining are on medical, manufacturing, industrial, sensor or “methodology” Total number of papers = 74 • Control/representation • Model based (~15%) • Data driven approaches (~5%) Counted papers relevant to manipulation and mobility ~9880 ICRA papers to date Disclaimer: This is not a scientific study! Conferences surveyed: ICRA 1984-86, 1998-2004

  8. Major Advances Academic/Government Labs • Inverse dynamics: application of feedback linearization to serial robots, now routinely used in industrial manipulators (e.g., ABB) • Time optimal control: along a path subject to dynamics, velocity and acceleration constraints, also used in industrial manipulators • Adaptive robot control: model based adaptive control with global stability guarantee • Nonholonomic control: control using time varying feedback or cyclic input, application of differential flat system theory, mostly applied to mobile robots and under-actuated robots. !!! !!! !? !!! Disclaimer: Not a survey of accomplishments/needs for AMM [Wen and Maciejewski, 04]

  9. Major Advances (Cont.) • Flexible joint robot modeling and control: Application of feedback linearization to flexible joint robots, applied to some industrial arms. • Teleoperation: wave variable based control for delay robustness. Guarantee stability, but user would feel delayed response. • Order N simulation: Application of order N computation to forward and inverse dynamics. Essential for large number degrees of freedom, e.g., robot with flexible link, micro-robots. • Hybrid force/position, impedance control: Simultaneous regulation of motion and force, applied to machining, assembly, haptic feedback, multi-finger control ?! ! !!! !!!

  10. Saturation of the area? All problems solved Not interesting Not relevant AMM Survey (?) ICRA 2000: Grasping and Manipulation Review [Bicchi and Kumar, 2000]

  11. Two other possibilities • Problems are too hard • Or • Nobody is interested in funding this work!

  12. Significant Accomplishments: Industry Remember those ~9880 ICRA papers? • Fanuc • 20% market share • 1800 employees (1300 in research labs, 10 Ph.Ds) • 10,000 robots • Technology provides the competitive edge • Before • servo motors/amplifiers • Now • collision detection, compliance control, payload inertia/weight identification, force/vision sensing/integration • robots assemble/test robots • beyond human performance Technology transfer does happen! And mobile manipulation!

  13. Results we can build on…(a parochial view) • Modeling/controlling humanoids • Dynamic manipulation and locomotion • Cooperative mobile manipulation • Distributed locomotion (and manipulation) systems • Haptics and teleoperation

  14. Humanoid dynamics and control • Integration (composition) • Integrated control of reach and posture • Task space versus posture space • Biomechanics for robotics • Realistic models • Minimum principles leading to realistic motions [Khatib]

  15. Humanoid dynamics and control • Whole-body multi-contact control • Multiple frictional contacts • Models • Posture • Legs • Locomotion [Khatib]

  16. Locomotion and Dexterous Manipulation • Dynamic manipulation and locomotion • Intermittent interaction • Passive dynamics • Reactive control [Rizzi]

  17. Significant Accomplishments: Academia • Multiple Mobile Manipulators • Multiple frictional contacts • Maintaining closure [Khatib] [Kumar] [Rus]

  18. M3 Modular Mobile Manipulation • Self-organizing, self-assembling, self-repair • Adapt structure • Multiple Functionalities • Can do work [Rus]

  19. Teleoperation and Haptics • High-DOF telemanipulators • Locomotion Interfaces [Hollerbach]

  20. And yet significant challenges remain! • No successful field deployment of mobile manipulators • Example: Robotic servicing of Hubble (NAS Committee: Brooks, Rock, Kumar) • ETS-VII (JAXA/NASA) • Model-based tele-manipulation • Visual servoing for acquisition of non cooperative targets • No robot (product) capable of physical interactions in unstructured environment • Example: Assistive Robotics

  21. Assistive Robotics • Impact • > 5 million wheelchair users* in the U.S. • > 730,000 strokes/year (2/3 disabled five years after stroke), > $50B/year • > 10,000 SCI/year (most < 20 yrs old) • Realistic • Human-in-the-loop • No competing technology • Many other overarching challenges *Inter Agency Working Group on Assistive Technology Mobility Devices

  22. Current technology • Artificial limbs: peg legs, hook hand • Crutches, canes, walkers • Wheelchairs • Environmental control systems • Remote control • Many, many customized products

  23. Significant Challenges, Problems • 1. New hardware, systems • 2. Modeling/control • 3. Composition, synthesis • 4. Model-based versus data-based

  24. Challenge: 10x reduction in effective inertia >20 cm compliant covering pHRI: Safety and Performance [Khatib]

  25. Haptic Interfaces and Mobility • Energetic/force interactions between robots and humans • Control simulations or real devices • Personal assist or amplification devices • Rehabilitation or exercise robots • Need haptic interfaces that allow manipulation while walking • Psychological argument for VR • Need to control robots that can reach/grasp/manipulate/lean/kick/push [Hollerbach]

  26. Portable Haptic Interfaces • Body-worn systems • Powered exoskeleton • Ground-based system with locomotion interface

  27. Representation and Control • Physics of environmental interaction • Distributed interaction • Whole arm/leg/body • Task representation for non-rigid interaction and manipulation • Control and task allocation of multi-function appendages (feet, legs, hands, arms, etc.) • Composition of closed-loop (perception/action) behaviors [Rizzi]

  28. Composition of Behaviors: Example • Four behaviors (closed-loop controllers) • Pre-shape (open/close) • Grasp/release • Reach/retract • Go to (move)

  29. Composition Pre-shape (close) > Retract

  30. Composition Retract > Move

  31. Composition Move || Pre-shape (open)

  32. Composition Move || Pre-shape (open)

  33. Composition Pre-shape (open) > Grasp

  34. Composition Grasp > Retract || Move

  35. Composition Move

  36. Composition Move > Reach > Release

  37. Composition

  38. Distributed Approaches and Modularity • Distributed Control • Heterogeneous systems with active modules, passive modules, and tools for mobile manipulation • Mobile sub-assemblies and hierarchical control Thanks to Hod Lipson

  39. Future Concept for Modular Robotsin Mobile Manipulation Concept: self-assembly with active grippers and rods Concept: mobile sub-assemblies note: mobile manipulation with dynamic kinematic topology for c-space Concept: self-inspection and self-repair with tools

  40. Distributed Approaches and Modularity Challenges • Control for systems with dynamic kinematic topology • Under-constraint systems with continuum of solutions • Control for systems with changing c-space • Geometrically-driven posture control • Control for keeping balance and structural integrity • Optimal morphologies for tasks • Uncertainty and Error in Modular Systems • Cooperative approach to error recovery in module and structure alignment, connections, assembly, and repair • Dynamical models with uncertainty

  41. Model-based vs. Data Driven • Control/representation • Model based (~15%) • Data driven approaches (~5%) • Dynamic models are getting more complicated and increasingly sensitive to parameters (uncertainty) • Emphasize completely data-driven approaches

  42. Discussion • Are there a set of basic research questions that • We can rally around? • Are unique to autonomous mobile manipulation? • Are critical? High-impact? • If so, can we create a new research program? • How do we sell it? • How do we take this to the next step? • Balance • basic research • high-caliber applied research • How do we make robotics a “big science”?

  43. Intellectual Basis for New Programin Autonomous Mobile Manipulation • Closed-loop behaviors • Perception-action loops • Vision-based control • Composition of behaviors • Sequential • Parallel, hierarchical • Task description language • Formal semantics • Uncertainty • Understanding and characterizing uncertainty • Data-driven approaches • Teleoperation and haptics • Integration mobility with manipulation Can it be a Tether-esque program?

More Related