joints enter the aforementioned critical area, and the intensity
coefficient
k
v
4 0 determines the deceleration magnitude when
the robot joints approach the joint-velocity limits
_
y
8
. Coefficients
k
p
and
k
v
should be chosen such that the feasible region of
€
y
converted by joint-angle limits (18) and joint-velocity limits (19)
is normally not smaller than the original one made by joint-
acceleration limits (20) .
However, in practical planar robot arms, the safety devices are
always used, in addition to the indefiniteness of
y
8
(i.e., the
values can be positive, zero or negative). If a joint of the robot arm
approaches or reaches its physical limit, the joint would be locked
by the physical safety device throughout the task duration, which
would lead to the failure of the end-effector task execution. It is
thus necessary to leave some ‘‘safety region’’ to the joint physical
limits
y
7
. Thus, (25) and (26) can be further improved into the
following expression:
z
i
¼ maxf
k
p
ðð
y
i
þ
W
i
Þ
y
i
Þ,
k
v
ð
_
y
i
_
y
i
Þ,
€
y
i
g,
z
þ
i
¼ minf
k
p
ðð
y
þ
i
W
i
Þ
y
i
Þ,
k
v
ð
_
y
þ
i
_
y
i
Þ,
€
y
þ
i
g,
i.e., the ones in Theorem 2, where
W
4 0 is a small constant vector
used to scale the safety region, with each element
W
i
(i ¼ 1, ..., nÞ
set to be, for example, 0.1745 rad (i.e., 10 degrees) in the ensuing
simulations of this paper. Thus, we have the QP reformulation
(21)–(23), and the proof is now complete. &
It is worth mentioning that the QP formulation of the ARMP
scheme cannot be derived by using the gradient-based neural
network (GNN) method. For details of the mathematical proof,
refer to Appendix B. In this sense, such novel derivations and
comparison also show the efficacy and superiority of the ZNN
approach on robotic problems solving and schemes design.
3. S-LVI-PDNN solver
As we know, the dual neural network approach requires online
inversion of coefficient matrix W [5]. In this section, to overcome
the weakness and improve the efficacy of the online solution of
QP (21)–(23), we present a simplified LVI-based primal-dual
neural network by using the following design method [23].
First, we convert QP problem (21)–(23) to a linear variational
inequality (LVI) problem. That is, to find a primal-dual equili-
brium vector u
n
A
O
:¼fu9u
r ur u
þ
gR
n þ m
such that
ðuu
n
Þ
T
ðMu
n
þqÞZ 0 8uA
O
, ð27Þ
where the primal-dual decision variable vector uA R
n þ m
and its
upper and lower bounds u
7
are defined, respectively, as
u ¼
x
y
"#
, u
þ
¼
z
þ
$
1
v
"#
, u
¼
z
$
1
v
"#
: ð28Þ
Appearing in the above equation, y A R
m
is a dual decision variable
vector defined corresponding to equality constraint (22),
1
v
¼½1, ..., 1
T
denotes an appropriately dimensioned vector com-
posed of ones, and
$
b 0 is sufficiently large to replace þ1
numerically for simulation and implementation purposes. Coeffi-
cient matrix MA R
ðn þ mÞðn þ mÞ
and vector qA R
n þ m
are defined as
M ¼
W J
T
J 0
"#
, q ¼
~
z
d
:
In summary, we can have the following important result (with
proof omitted due to space limitation and generalizable from
[22,28]).
Lemma 1. With the existence of optimal solution x
n
, the QP problem
(21)–(23) can be converted to the LVI problem (27).
Second, it is known that LVI problem (27) is equivalent to the
following piecewise-linear equation [5,34,36]:
P
O
ðuðMuþqÞÞu ¼ 0, ð29Þ
where P
O
ðÞ is a simple projection operator from R
n þ m
onto set
O
,
and the ith output of P
O
ðuÞ is defined as
u
i
if u
i
o u
i
,
u
i
if u
i
r u
i
r u
þ
i
,
u
,
if u
i
4 u
þ
i
:
8
>
<
>
:
8iA f1, 2, ..., nþmg
Third, to solve (29), guided by design experience [5 ,34], we can
adopt the following dynamics [which is actually the LVI-PDNN
solver for QP (21)–(23)]:
_
u ¼
g
ðIþ M
T
ÞðP
O
ðuðMuþqÞÞuÞ: ð30Þ
In this paper, by canceling the scaling term ðIþM
T
Þ of LVI-PDNN
(30), we obtain the following simplified LVI-based primal-dual
neural network:
_
u ¼
g
ðP
O
ðuðMuþqÞÞuÞ: ð31Þ
In (30) and (31),
g
A R is a positive design parameter used to adjust
the convergence rate of the neural networks. Besides, we can have
the following theoretical results about the S-LVI-PDNN (31)
[23,28].
Theorem 3. Assume the existence of optimal solution x
n
to the
strictly convex QP problem depicted in (21)–(23). Being the first n
element of state u(t), output x(t) of the simplified LVI-based primal-
dual neural network (31) is globally exponentially convergent to
optimal solution x
n
. In addition, the exponential convergence rate is
proportional to
g
.
Proof. Can be generalized from [23,37]. &
Corollary 3.1. The existence of equilibrium point u
n
of the S-LVI-
PDNN model (31) is equivalent to the nonempty of the feasible region
made by constraints (22) and (23), denoted by
U
ðxÞ. In the robotic
QP formulation (21)–(23),
U
ðxÞa | if and only if the end-effector
path-tracking task is feasible.
Contrary to Corollary 3.1, the nonexistence of u
n
(or x
n
) means
the no-solution case. A large number of randomly generated
numerical tests [23] show that, although state y may usually be
divergent, the output x(t) of S-LVI-PDNN (31) is always conver-
gent. This property is very useful in robotic applications. That is,
even if the end-effector path-tracking task is not feasible, the
output x(t) of S-LVI-PDNN (31) is always convergent and provides
an approximate solution to the ARMP scheme.
Remarks. Most controllers are digital in the robotic industry.
To implement the S-LVI-PDNN in practice, in addition to analog
circuit implementations, MATLAB routine ‘‘ODE’’ as an alternative
approach can be employed to generate discrete-time solutions of
such a neural network. In this paper, ODE15SðODEFUN, ½0 : 0:01 :
T, Y0, OPTIONSÞ is adopted. The solutions generated by such an
‘‘ODE15s’’ solver are discrete-time with a fixed time gap being
0.01 s, and can meet the requirement of digital controllers. Thus,
the S-LVI-PDNN is realizable and applicable in the robotic
industry.
4. Application to three-link planar arm
In order to test the proposed ARMP scheme (16)–(20 ),computer
simulations are performed based on a physically constrained three-
link planar robot arm by using the simplified LVI-based primal dual
Y. Zhang et al. / Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing 29 (2013) 328–343 331