ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
An efficient, error-bounded approximation algorithm for simulating quasi-statics of complex linkages
Full text PdfPdf (760 KB)
Source ACM Symposium on Solid and Physical Modeling archive
Proceedings of the 2005 ACM symposium on Solid and physical modeling table of contents
Cambridge, Massachusetts
Pages: 175 - 186  
Year of Publication: 2005
ISBN:1-59593-015-9
Authors
Stephane Redon  University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
Ming C. Lin  University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
Sponsor
SIGGRAPH: ACM Special Interest Group on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 2,   Downloads (12 Months): 19,   Citation Count: 2
Additional Information:

abstract   references   cited by   index terms   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Review this Article  
Save this Article to a Binder    Display Formats: BibTex  EndNote ACM Ref   
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1060244.1060264
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

Design and analysis of articulated mechanical structures, commonly referred to as linkages, is an integral part of any CAD/CAM system. The most common approaches formulate the problem as purely geometric in nature, though dynamics or quasi-statics of linkages should also be considered. Existing optimal algorithms that compute forward dynamics or quasi-statics of linkages have a linear runtime dependence on the number of joints in the linkage. When forces are applied to a linkage, these techniques need to compute the accelerations of all the joints and can become impractical for rapid prototyping of highly complex linkages with a large number of joints.We introduce a novel algorithm that enables adaptive refinement of the forward quasi-statics simulation of complex linkages. This algorithm can cull away joints whose contribution to the overall linkage motion is below a given user-defined threshold, thus limiting the computation of the joint accelerations and forces to those that contribute most to the overall motion. It also allows a natural trade-off between the precision of the resulting simulation and the time required to compute it. We have implemented our algorithm and tested its performance on complex benchmarks consisting of up to 50,000 joints. We demonstrate that in some cases our algorithm is able to achieve up to two orders of magnitude of performance improvement, while providing a high-precision, error-bounded approximation of the quasi-statics of the simulated linkage.


REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

 
1
Bae, D., and Hauge, E. 1987. A recursive formulation for constrained mechanical systems dynamics: Part i. open-loop systems. Mechanical Structures and Machines, Vol. 15, No. 3, pp. 359--382.
 
2
Brandl, H., Johanni, R., and Otter, M. 1986. A very efficient algorithm for the simulation of robots and similar multibody systems without inversion of the mass matrix. IFAC/IFIP/IMACS Symposium, pp. 95--100.
 
3
Featherstone, R., and Orin, D. E. 2000. Robot dynamics: Equations and algorithms. IEEE Int. Conf. Robotics and Automation, pp. 826--834.
 
4
 
5
Featherstone, R. 1999. A divide-and-conquer articulated body algorithm for parallel o(log(n)) calculation of rigid body dynamics. part 1: Basic algorithm. International Journal of Robotics Research 18(9): 867--875.
 
6
Featherstone, R. 1999. A divide-and-conquer articulated body algorithm for parallel o(log(n)) calculation of rigid body dynamics. part 2: Trees, loops, and accuracy. International Journal of Robotics Research 18(9): 876--892.
 
7
Fijany, A., Sharf, I., and D'Eleuterio, G. 1995. Parallel o(log n) algorithms for computation of manipulator forward dynamics. IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation 11(3): 389400.
 
8
Hollerbach, J. 1980. A recursive lagrangian formulation of manipulator dynamics and a comparative study of dynamics formulation complexity. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Vol. SMC-10, No. 11.
 
9
Hooker, W., and Margulies, G. 1965. The dynamical attitude equations for an n-body satellite. Journal of Astronautical Sciences, Vol. 12.
10
 
11
McMillan, S., and Orin, D. E. 1995. Efficient computation of articulated-body inertias using successive axial screws. IEEE Trans. on Robotics and Automation, vol. 11, pp. 606--611.
 
12
Mueller, A., and Maisser, P. 2003. A lie-group formulation of kinematics and dynamics of constrained mbs and its application to analytical mechanics. Multibody System Dynamics, vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 311--352(42).
 
13
Redon, S., Galoppo, N., and Lin, M. C. 2005. Adaptive dynamics: Algorithms and analysis. UNC Chapel Hill Technical Report TR05--006.
 
14


Collaborative Colleagues:
Stephane Redon: colleagues
Ming C. Lin: colleagues