Correct modeling of friction forces during constrained robotic operations is critical to high-fidelity contact dynamics simulation. Such simulations are particularly important for the development, mission planning and operations analysis of space robotic systems. Most existing friction models employ the coefficient of friction to capture the relationship between the friction force and the normal load. Hence, accurate identification of this parameter is prerequisite to accurate simulation. This issue is particularly important for space robotic operations since friction characteristics of materials are very different in space. In this manuscript, the problem of identification of the coefficient of friction is investigated experimentally and numerically. The motivating application being space manipulator systems, our principal objective is to develop a practical off-line identification algorithm, requiring minimum number of measurements from sensors available on space robots. To this end, a strategy is proposed to determine the coefficient of friction by using only the measured end-effector forces. The key idea behind the method is that during one-point contact, these forces represent the contact force and hence, can be directly used to calculate the coefficient of friction. The proposed approach is tested with the experimental data from peg insertion experiments conducted on a planar robotics test-bed with a specially designed contact interface. The algorithm is generalized to arbitrary complex geometries and applied to identify the coefficient of friction for a simulated battery drop test.

1.
Han
,
I.
, and
Gilmore
,
B. J.
,
1993
, “
Multi-Body Impact Motion with Friction–Analysis, Simulation and Experimental Validation
,”
ASME J. Mech. Des.
,
115
, pp.
412
422
.
2.
Hurmuzlu
,
Y.
, and
Marghitu
,
D. B.
,
1994
, “
Rigid Body Collision of Planar Kinematic Chains with Multiple Contact Points
,”
Int. J. Robot. Res.
,
13
(
1
), pp.
82
92
.
3.
Ma
,
O.
,
Buhariwala
,
K.
,
Roger
,
N.
,
MacLean
,
J.
, and
Carr
,
R.
,
1997
, “
MDSF–A Generic Development and Simulation Facility for Flexible, Complex Robotic Systems
,”
Robotica
,
15
, pp.
49
62
.
4.
Vukobratovic
,
M. K.
, and
Potkonjak
,
V.
,
1999
, “
Dynamics of Contact Tasks in Robotics. Part I: General Model of Robot Interacting With Environment
,”
Mech. Mach. Theory
,
34
, pp.
923
942
.
5.
De Jalon, J.G., and Bayo, E., 1993, Kinematic and Dynamic Simulation of Multibody Systems—The Real Time Challenge, Mechanical Engineering Series, Springer-Verlag, New York.
6.
Kim, S.W., 1999, “Contact Dynamics and Force Control of Flexible Multi-Body Systems,” Ph.D. Thesis, Dept. of Mechanical Engineering, McGill Univ., Montreal, Canada.
7.
Farahani
,
K.
,
Mofid
,
M.
, and
Vafai
,
A.
,
2000
, “
A Solution Method for General Contact-Impact Problems
,”
Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng.
,
187
, pp.
69
77
.
8.
Kilmister, C. W., and Reeve, J. E., 1966, Rational Mechanics, American Elsevier, New York.
9.
Haug
,
E. J.
,
Wu
,
S. C.
, and
Yang
,
S. M.
,
1986
, “
Dynamics of Mechanical Systems with Coulomb Friction, Stiction, Impact and Constraint Addition-Deletion
,”
Mech. Mach. Theory
,
21
(
5
), pp.
401
406
.
10.
Wang
,
Y. T.
, and
Kumar
,
V.
,
1994
, “
Simulation of Mechanical Systems With Multiple Frictional Contacts
,”
ASME J. Mech. Des.
,
116
, pp.
571
580
.
11.
Armstrong-Helouvry
,
B.
,
Dupont
,
P.
, and
Canudas de Wit
,
C.
,
1994
, “
A Survey of Models, Analysis Tools and Compensation Methods for the Controls of Machines With Friction
,”
Automatica
,
30
(
7
), pp.
1083
1138
.
12.
Ma, O., 1995, “Contact Dynamics Modeling for the Simulation of the Space Station Manipulators Handling Payloads,” Proc. of 1995 IEEE Int. Conf. on Robotics and Automation, 2, pp. 1252–1258.
13.
Oden
,
J. T.
, and
Pires
,
E. B.
,
1983
, “
Nonlocal and Nonlinear Friction Laws and Variational Principles for Contact Problems in Elasticity
,”
ASME J. Appl. Mech.
,
50
, pp.
67
76
.
14.
Haessig
,
D. A.
, and
Friedland
,
B.
,
1991
, “
On the Modeling and Simulation of Friction
,”
ASME J. Dyn. Syst., Meas., Control
,
113
, pp.
354
362
.
15.
Nobre
,
J. P.
,
Dias
,
A. M.
, and
Gras
,
R.
,
1999
, “
A Study on Elasto-Plastic Impact Friction
,”
Wear
,
230
(
2
), pp.
133
145
.
16.
Arnell, R. D., Davies, P. B., Halling, J., and Whomes, T. L., 1991, Tribology: Principles and Design Applications, Springer-Verlag, New York.
17.
Maw
,
N.
,
Barber
,
J. R.
, and
Fawcett
,
J. N.
,
1981
, “
The Role of Elastic Tangential Compliance in Oblique Impact
,”
ASME J. Lubr. Technol
,
103
, pp.
74
80
.
18.
Jeon, J. Y., Lee, S. W., Chae, H. K., and Kim, J. H., 1996, “Low Velocity Friction Identification and Compensation Using Accelerated Evolutionary Programming,” Proc. of Int. Conf. on Evolutionary Computation, Nagoya, Japan, 5, pp. 372–377.
19.
Lee
,
S. W.
, and
Kim
,
J. H.
,
1999
, “
Friction Identification Using Evolution Strategies and Robust Control of Positioning Tables
,”
ASME J. Dyn. Syst., Meas., Control
,
121
, pp.
619
624
.
20.
Whitney
,
D. E.
,
1982
, “
Quasi-Static Assembly of Compliantly Supported Rigid Parts
,”
ASME J. Dyn. Syst., Meas., Control
,
104
, pp.
65
77
.
21.
McKerrow, P. J., 1991, Introduction to Robotics, Addison-Wesley.
22.
Van Vliet
,
J.
,
Sharf
,
I.
, and
Ma
,
O.
,
2000
, “
Experimental Validation of Contact Dynamics Simulation of Constrained Robotic Tasks
,”
Int. J. Robot. Res.
19
(
12
), pp.
1203
1217
.
23.
Sharf, I.. and Crawford, C., 1999, “Investigation of Contact Parameters From Constrained Robotic Tasks: Estimation of Coefficient of Friction,” Univ. of Victoria–Dept. of Mechanical Engineering, Internal Report.
24.
Van Vliet, J., and Sharf, I., 1999, “Experimental Investigation of Contact Tasks for Space-Based Manipulators: Further Validation of MDSF Contact Dynamics Capabilities,” Final Report submitted to SPAR Aerospace and Canadian Space Agency, 158 pp.
25.
Ma, O., 1999, Contact Dynamics Toolkit (CDT) User’s Guide, Version CDT_98, Release 4, Document MDSAR TN.R&D-1999.93, MacDonald Dettwiler Space and Advanced Robotics Ltd., Ontario, Canada.
You do not currently have access to this content.