Inertial-space disturbance rejection for space-based manipulators

Abstract

The implementation of a disturbance rejection controller for a 6-DOF PUMA manipulator mounted on a 3-DOF platform was described. A control algorithm is designed to track the desired position and attitude of the end-effector in inertial space, subject to unknown disturbances in the platform axes. Experimental results are presented for step, sinusoidal, and random disturbances in the platform rotational axis and in the neighborhood of kinematic singularities. Robotic manipulators were proposed as a means of reducing the amount of extra vehicular activity time required for space station assembly and maintenance. The proposed scenario involves a robotic manipulator attached to some mobile platform, such as a spacecraft, satellite, or the space station itself. Disturbances in the platform position and attitude may prevent the manipulator from successfully completing the task. The possibility of using the manipulator to compensate for platform disturbances was explored. The problem of controlling a robotic manipulator on a mobile platform has received considerable attention in the past few years. Joshi and Desrochers designed a nonlinear feedback control law to carry out tasks (with respect to the robot base frame) in the presence of roll, pitch and yaw disturbances in the platform axes. Dubowsky, Vance, and Torres proposed a time-optimal planning algorithm for a robotic manipulator mounted on a spacecraft, subject to saturation limits in the attitude control reaction jets. Papadopoulos and Dubowsky developed a general framework for analyzing the control of free-floating space manipulator systems. Most recently, Torres and Dubowsky have presented a technique called the enhanced disturbance map to find manipulator trajectories that reduce the effect of disturbances in the spacecraft position and attitude. One common assumption in the literature is that the disturbance signal is exactly known. If this is the case, then the end-effector location can be calculated without relying on direct end-point sensing. However, this assumption is invalid if there is a significant delay in the platform position and attitude measurements, or if the kinematics of the platform are not well known, or if the platform is a non-rigid structure. In the more likely case that only the nominal platform location and upper bound on the disturbance signal are known, direct end-point sensing is needed to measure the end-effector location