DOI: 10.17586/2226-1494-2015-15-3-418-425


D. N. Bazylev, A. A. Pyrkin, A. A. Margun, K. A. Zimenko, A. S. Kremlev, D. D. Ibraev, M. Čech

Read the full article 
Article in Russian

For citation: Bazylev D.N., Pyrkin A.A., Margun A.A., Zimenko K.A., Kremlev A.S., Ibraev D.D., Cech M. Approaches for stabilizing of biped robots in a standing position on movable support. Scientific and Technical Journal of Information Technologies, Mechanics and Optics, 2015, vol.15, no. 3, pp. 418–425.

Subject of research. The problem of stabilization for biped walking robots on the surface is considered. The angle and angular velocity of the movable surface varies randomly in a limited range. Methods. Two approaches of stabilization of biped robots are proposed. The first approach requires the construction of kinematic and dynamic models of the robot. Dynamic equations were obtained using the Euler-Lagrange method. The control algorithm is based on the method of inverse dynamics, in which the original nonlinear dynamic model is linearized by a feedback. The second stabilization algorithm uses only the kinematic model of the robot. A hybrid controller is developed for this approach. In the case of low angular velocities of the movable support the robot stabilization is performed by PD controller on the basis of the angle error of deflection of the servo shaft. In the case of relatively high angular velocities of the support the controller also uses the gyroscope readings mounted in the robot torso. Maintenance of the robot’s gravity center over the center of bearing area for providing a stable position was chosen as a goal of control in both approaches. Main results. Efficiency and effectiveness of the proposed approaches for stabilization of biped robots on the moving surface are demonstrated by the numerical simulation. Both methods provide stability of the balancing robots on changing the angle of inclination and angular velocity of the moving surface in the ranges (50; 50) and (40 / sec; 40 / sec) , respectively. Comparative analysis of these approaches under identical requirements for quality indicators of transients is also provided: transient time 0.2 sec п t  and overshoot   0%. The conditions under which each of the control methods will be more effective in practice are identified.

Keywords: walking robot, movable support, stabilization, control system.

Acknowledgements. This work was partially financially supported by the Government of the Russian Federation, Grant 074-U01. The work was supported by the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation (project 14.Z50.31.0031).

1. Berkemeier M.D., Fearing R.S. Control of a two-link robot to achieve sliding and hopping gaits. Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. on Robotics and Automation. Nice, France, 1992, vol. 1, pp. 286–291.
2. Collins S., Ruina A., Tedrake R., Wisse M. Efficient bipedal robots based on passive-dynamic walkers. Science, 2005, vol. 307, no. 5712, pp. 1082–1085. doi: 10.1126/science.1107799
3. Grizzle W., Abba G., Plestan F. Asymptotically stable walking for biped robots: analysis via systems with impulse effects. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 2001, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 51–64. doi: 10.1109/9.898695
4. Westervelt E.R., Grizzle J.W., Chevallereau C., Choi J.H., Morris B. Feedback Control of Dynamic Bipedal Robot Locomotion. Boca Raton-London-New York, CRC Press, 2007, 528 p.
5. Goswami A., Espiau B., Keramane A. Limit cycles in a passive compass gait biped and passivity-mimicking control laws. Autonomous Robots, 1997, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 273–286.
6. Freidovich L.B., Mettin U., Shiriaev A.S., Spong M.W. A passive 2-DOF walker: hunting for gaits using virtual holonomic constraints. IEEE Transactions on Robotics, 2009, vol. 25, no. 5, pp. 1202–1208. doi: 10.1109/TRO.2009.2028757
7. McGeer T. Passive dynamic walking. International Journal of Robotics Research, 1990, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 62–82.
8. Shiriaev A., Perram J.W., Canudas-de-Wit C. Constructive tool for orbital stabilization of underactuated nonlinear systems: virtual constraints approach. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 2005, vol. 50, no. 8, pp. 1164–1176. doi: 10.1109/TAC.2005.852568
9. Shiriaev A., Robertsson A., Perram J., Sandberg A. Periodic motion planning for virtually constrained mechanical system. Proc. 44th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, and the European Control Conference, CDC-ECC'05. Seville, Spain, 2006, vol. 2005, pp. 4035–4040. doi: 10.1109/CDC.2005.1582793
10. Eaton M. Evolutionary humanoid robotics: past, present and future. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2007, vol. 4850 LNAI, pp. 42–52.
11. Thai C.N., Paulishen M. Using robotis bioloid systems for instructional robotics. Proc. IEEE Southeast Conference 2011. Nashville, USA, 2011, pp. 300–306. doi: 10.1109/SECON.2011.5752954
12. Rokbani N., Zaidi A., Alimi A.M. Prototyping a biped robot using an educational robotics kit. Proc. Int. Conf. on Education and e-Learning Innovations, ICEELI 2012. Sousse, Tunisia, 2012, art. 6360682. doi: 10.1109/ICEELI.2012.6360682
13. Bazylev D., Pyrkin A. Stabilization of biped robot standing on nonstationary plane. Proc. 18th IEEE Int. Conf. on Methods and Models in Automation and Robotics, MMAR 2013. Miedzyzdroje, Poland, 2013, pp. 459–463.
14. Bazylev D., Kremlev A., Margun А., Zimenko K. Control system of biped robot balancing on board. Proc. 19th Int. Conf. on Methods and Models in Automation and Robotics, MMAR 2014. Miedzyzdroje, Poland, 2014, pp. 794–799. doi: 10.1109/MMAR.2014.6957457
15. Spong M.W., Hutchinson S., Vidyasagar M. Robot Modeling and Control. NY, Wiley, 2005, 496 p.

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
Copyright 2001-2018 ©
Scientific and Technical Journal
of Information Technologies, Mechanics and Optics.
All rights reserved.