In a conventional bilateral teleoperation, transmission delay over the internet can potentially cause instability. One of the more robust methods of dealing with this problem is the wave variable. Wave variable guarantees teleoperation stability even under varying transmission delay at the cost of poor transient performance. Adding a predictor on the master side can reduce this undesirable side-effect, but that would require a slave model. Inaccurate slave model used in the predictor as well as variations in transmission delay, both of which are likely under realistic situations, can result in steady state errors. A direct drift control algorithm is used to drive this error to zero regardless of the source of error. A semi-adaptive predictor that can distinguish between free space and rigid contact environment is also used to provide a more accurate force feedback on the master side. This research presents the experimental results and evaluations of the previously mentioned wave variable based methods under realistic operation environment using real master and slave.

Volume Subject Area:
Dynamic Systems and Technology
Keywords:
teleoperation, wave variable, predictor, drift control
Topics:
Internet, Waves
1.
W. R. Ferrell, “Delay Force Feedback,” IEEE Transactions on Human Factors in Electronics, 449–455, October 1966.
2.
Smith
J. M.
, “
Closer Control of Loops with Dead Time
,”
Chemical Engineering Progress
, Vol.
53
, No.
5
, pp.
217
–
219
, May
1957
.
3.
Oboe
R.
and
Fiorini
P.
, “
A Design and Control Environment for Internet-Based Telerobotics
,”
International Journal of Robotics Research
, Vol.
17
, No.
4
, pp.
433
–
339
,
1998
.
4.
Llewellyn
F. B.
, “
Some Fundamental Properties of Transmission Systems
,”
Proceeedings of IRE
, Vol.
40
, No. 5, pp.
271
–
283
,
1952
.
5.
T. Imaida, Y. Yokokohji, T. Doi, M. Oda, and T. Yoshikawa, “Ground-Space Bilateral Teleoperation of ETS-VII Robot Arm by Direct Bilateral Coupling under 7-S Time Delay Condition,” IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation, Vol. 20, No. 3, June 2004.
6.
Leung
G. M. H.
 et al., “
Bilateral Controller for Teleoperators with Time Delay via μ-Synthesis
,”
IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automations
, Vol.
11
, pp.
105
–
116
, February
1995
.
7.
Kim
W. S.
,
Hannaford
B.
,
Bejczy
A. K.
, “
Force Reflection and Shared Compliant Control in Operating Telemanipulators with Time Delay
,”
IEEE Transaction on Robotics and Automation
, Vol.
8
, pp.
176
–
185
, April
1992
.
8.
Y. Tsumaki, Y. Hoshi, H. Naruse, and M. Uchiyama, “Virtual Reality Based Teleoperation which Tolerates Geometrical Modeling Errors,” Proceedings of IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems 1996, pp. 1023–1030.
9.
J. Funda and R. P. Paul, “Model-Based, Delay-Tolerant Teleoperation in Unstructured Environments,” Electrotechnical Conference, 1991. Proceedings, 6th Mediterranean, 22–24 May 1991.
10.
T. Kotoku, “A Predictive Display with Force Feedback and its Application to Remote Manipulation System with Transmission Time Delay,” Proceedings of 1992 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Raleigh, NC, 7–10 July 1992.
11.
L. F. Penin, K. Matsumoto, and S. Wakabayashi, “Force Reflection for Time-Delayed Teleoperation of Space Robots,” Proceedings of the 2000 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, San Francisco, CA, April 2000.
12.
R. J. Anderson and M. W. Spong, “Asymptotic Stability for Force Reflecting Teleoperations with Time Delay,” presented at the IEEE International Conference Robotics and Automation, Scottsdale, AZ, 1989.
13.
G. Niemeyer and J. E. Slotine, “Stable Adaptive Teleoperation,” IEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering, Vol. 16, No. 1, January 1991.
14.
C. A. Lawn and B. Hannaford, “Performance Testing of Passive Communication and Control in Teleoperation with Time Delay,” Proceedings IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Vol. 3, 1993, pp. 776–783.
15.
C. Benedetti, M. Franchini, and P. Fiorini, “Stable Tracking in Variable Time-Delay Teleoperation,” Proceedings of the 2001 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Maui, HI, USA, October 29–November 3 2001.
16.
J. Y. Lew and D. Repperger, “Wave Variables Based Teleoperation with Time Delay: Application to Space Based Laser Maintenance,” IEEEAC paper 1236, Version, Feburary 2004.
17.
S. Ganjefar, H. Momeni, F. Janabi-Sharifi, “Teleoperation Systems Design Using Augmented Wave- Variables and Smith Predictor Method for Reducing Time-Delay Effects,” Proceedings of the 2002 IEEE, International Symposium on Intelligent Control, Vancouver, Canada, October 27–30, 2002.
18.
S. Munir and W. J. Book, “Wave-Based Teleoperation with Prediction,” Proceedings of the American Control Conference, p. 4605–4611, Arlington, VA, June 2001.
19.
H. Arioui, A. Kheddar, and S. Mammar, “A Predictive Wave-Based Approach for Time Delayed Virtual Environments Haptics Systems,” Proceedings of the 2002 IEEE, International Workshop on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, Berlin, Germany, September 25–27, 2002.
20.
Y. Yokokohji, T. Imaida, and T. Yoshikawa, “Bilateral Teleoperation under Time-Varying Communication Delay,” Proceedings of the 1999 IEEE/RSJ, International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems.
21.
Y. Yokokohji, T. Imaida, and T. Yoshikawa, “Bilateral Control with Energy Balance Monitoring Under Time-Varying Communication Delay,” Proceedings of the 2000 IEEE, International Conference on Robotics and Automation, San Francisco, CA, April 2000.
22.
T. Mirfakhrai and S. Payandeh, “A Delay Prediction Approach for Teleoperation over the Internet,” Proceedings of the 2002 IEEE, International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Washington DC, May 2002.
23.
K. Kosuge, H. Murayama, K. Takeo, “Bilateral Feedback Control of Telemanipulators via Computer Network,” Proceedings of IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, 1996, pp. 1380–1385.
This content is only available via PDF.
Copyright © 2005
 by ASME
You do not currently have access to this content.