Automation in Construction 91 (2018) 92–99

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Automation in Construction
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/autcon

A control method for hydraulic manipulators in automatic emulsion filling T

a b a a,*
Weidong Wang , Hongpeng Chi , Siyu Zhao , Zhijiang Du
a
State Key Laboratory of Robotics and System, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin 150001, China
b
Beijing General Research Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, Beijing 100160, China

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: For autonomous operation of hydraulic manipulators, environmental perception and autonomous control are
Hydraulic manipulator two research priorities. In this paper, our research focuses on emulsion explosive self-filling, including self-
Borehole identification identification of boreholes and autonomous control of manipulators. In an effort to achieve that purpose, we
Inverse kinematics establish the kinematics model of the 5-DOF hydraulic manipulator which is transformed from a crane. Vision
Numerical solution
and laser range sensors are employed to measure the positions and orientations of boreholes. Additionally, a
novel inverse kinematics numerical method of the 5-DOF manipulator is presented that only needs information
of Z-axis direction vector and the position of end effector. Several experiments are performed to verify the
feasibility of the control method for unmanned filling of emulsion explosives by the hydraulic manipulator.

1. Introduction machinery, Vihonen [7] established a method to measure the joint

Hydraulic manipulators have been widely used in construction and
mining industries due to their superior capabilities of large load and
workspace over the past few decades [1, 2]. However, most of these
machines still cannot work without remote operation, which requires
human skill and experience. And even skilled operators may be sus-
ceptible to human errors. In some cases, the accuracy of human op-
eration cannot be up to the acceptance standard. Hence, the realization
of construction machinery automation has become a research hotspot.
Two key technologies need to be solved in the process of con-
struction machinery automation transformation. One technology lies in
the kinematics modeling and control algorithm of the manipulator,
including the measurement of joint angles, the establishment of kine-
matics model and the control method of end effector's pose. The other is
the environmental perception and the interaction between manipulator
and its surroundings.
In most cases, the joint angles of manipulator are obtained by the
use of vision, inertial measurement unit (IMU) [3], laser radar or data
fusion of multiple sensors. Lundeen [4] presented a method of esti-
mation for articulated excavator's end effector pose based on optical
marker and vision. Although the vision was found to be vulnerable to
environmental factors, its low-cost characteristics determine that it is
still worthy of extension. Cheng [5] employed accelerometer and gy-
roscope to measure the robot's joint angles, and compared the accuracy
of several fusion algorithms. Martinelli [6] proposed the use of visual
and IMU data fusion which enriched the measurement methods and
improved the corresponding accuracy. In the field of engineering
angles of the manipulator with accelerometer and gyroscope, and then
tested it in the practical environment. Compared with the use of en-
coders, the advantages of such approaches are easy to install additional
devices and to transform the original equipment when there are no
higher demands for accuracy, especially in the application of en-
gineering machinery. However, these measurement methods are of low
accuracy in obtaining the joint angles. Due to this fact, in order to
realize precision control of a 5-m long hydraulic manipulator, in this
work, the joint angle measurement is carried out by an encoder.
Most of the interaction modeling between the manipulator and the
environment is based on stereo vision, radar or laser radar which in-
volves 3D environment modeling and interaction modeling [8]. Stereo
vision is susceptible to environmental factors, and the electromagnetic
radiation produced by radar will damage human health. So now the
laser radar is mostly employed as a tool for environmental construction.
Soltani [9] established a 3D model of surroundings through vision, and
a virtual scene with the excavator model was established to monitor the
project's progress and the working conditions. Brooker [10] introduced
the advantages and disadvantages of various radar and processing al-
gorithms systematically, and a comprehensive overview about radar
wave's application in mining machinery was summarized. There were a
large quantity of researches focusing on 3D construction by laser radar
that was widely used in unmanned vehicles and mobile robots, so this
method would not be introduced in detail in the following sections.
Most scholars put emphasis on the interaction modeling among
mobile platforms, manipulators and surroundings [11, 12]. Ro-
berts [13] installed a 2D laser radar at the end of the excavators,

*
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: duzj01@hit.edu.cn (Z. Du).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2018.03.001
Received 27 March 2017; Received in revised form 13 February 2018; Accepted 1 March 2018
0926-5805/ © 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
W. Wang et al.
making full use of the bucket rotation to drive the laser radar to gen-
erate the 3D environment model. Dunbabin [14] adopted the same
method as Boberts' to establish the 3D interaction models, and extracted
the bucket positions from the data of laser radar to conduct the motion
planning, realizing the full automation of excavation. Kashani [15]
proposed that the laser radar should be mounted on the mobile plat-
form to avoid the vibration caused by manipulators which could lead to
the instability of the data collection, and then established the point
cloud filtering algorithm and reconstruction algorithm to improve the
accuracy of end effector pose estimation and trajectory tracking. Ex-
perimental results demonstrated that this approach improved the ac-
curacy of heavy machinery automation. However, since a considerable
amount of data need to be used for generating 3D environment models
with point cloud algorithm, costly laser radar and high-performance
computer are necessary. According to the practical application, in this
work, taking the advantages and disadvantages of vision- and laser-
based systems into account, four single point lasers and a camera are
used to measure the relative position and attitude of the target hole
towards the manipulator. Then a reliable and economical platform for
self-identification of vertical boreholes is established.
This paper addresses an inverse kinematic problem for a 5-DOF
manipulator. Closed-form and numerical solutions are two major ca-
tegories of solutions for inverse kinematics problems. Closed-form so-
lutions are desirable because they are exact and faster to compute, and
all possible solutions can be identified when multiple solutions exist.
However, closed-form solutions are only available for a few special
kinematic structures, such as 6-DOF robots. In some cases where solu-
tions do exist, they often cannot be presented in closed-form, so nu-
merical methods are required. Different from the algebraic and geo-
metric methods used to find closed-form solutions, numerical methods
do not depend on robots, so they can be applied to any kinematic
structures. Tsai and Morgan [16] proposed a numerical approach to
solve the inverse kinematics for a general 6R (revolute-joint) or 5R
manipulator by using continuation methods. Angeles [17] employed
the least-squares approximation technique to solve the inverse kine-
matics of general 5-DOF manipulators in a numerical way.
In recent years, most of the studies have been aimed at establishing
inverse kinematics to special application requirements and mechanical
structures. For a table wiping task, Masayuki [18] constituted a new 6R
robot from a 5-DOF manipulator by using a virtual rotary joint. For a
special structure, Zhu [19] decomposed the inverse kinematics problem
into two subproblems by exploring the characteristics of the machine's
kinematic structure. The revolute joint coordinates are found using
nonlinear optimization, and the prismatic joint coordinates are com-
puted with closed-form formulas. In this work, because the goal of robot
control is the end position and the Z-axis attitude, a numerical inverse
kinematics of a 5-DOF manipulator only knowing Z-axis direction and
the end position is developed.
In this paper, we develop a kind of automatic filling device for
emulsion explosives, as shown in Fig. 1, which is composed of vehicle,
emulsion explosive storage tank and manipulator. This 5-DOF hydraulic
manipulator is transformed from that of a crane with sensors and pipe
feeding device mounted on it, which are applied for detecting bore-
holes' positions and conveying the emulsion explosives. The steps of
emulsion explosive filling for the 5-DOF hydraulic manipulator can be
described as follows:
• Step 1: Drill a hole using another machine on the target wall with a
diameter of 10 cm that is used for filling emulsion explosives.
• Step 2: The manipulator identifies the borehole's position through
sensors mounted at the distal end, and then inserts the feeding pipe
into the hole. This step is the focus of this paper.
• Step 3: Transport emulsion explosives into the borehole.
The main contributions of this paper are as follows: 1) The me-
chanical arm of a crane is transformed into the 5-DOF hydraulic
93
Automation in Construction 91 (2018) 92–99
manipulator, and additional encoders are used to measure its joint
angles. And then the kinematics model is established for servo control
of the manipulator. 2) A novel approach for obtaining the position and
orientation of boreholes is proposed by use of a vision sensor and laser
range sensors. 3) A method of inverse kinematics numerical solution for
the 5-DOF hydraulic arm is presented which is only concerned with Z-
axis direction and the end position. Therefore, the remainder of this
paper will be organized as this three points accordingly.
2. Control method of the 5-DOF hydraulic manipulator
In this paper, we employ the crane arm as the manipulator. By
adding two additional hydraulic rotary motors at the end of the arm,
which are used for adjusting the end posture, a new 5-DOF manipulator
is constructed based on the original one. The following will introduce
the joint servo control, kinematics model and inverse kinematics nu-
merical solution respectively.
2.1. Joint servo control
As the alignment accuracy of the manipulator to the hole is of +/−
2.5 cm, only employing IMU to obtain joint angles is far from the re-
quirements. Absolute angle encoders, therefore, are added on the joints
to measure the values more precisely, and with these feedback, a PID
servo controller is employed to realize the joint position control.
2.2. Kinematics model
The coordinate systems of the 5-DOF manipulator are established as
i
shown in Fig. 2. Set coordinate system Oxyz at joint i, where
t
i = 1,2,3,4,5, and set the coordinate system Oxyz at the feeding pipe
nozzle. The Denavit–Hartenberg (DH) parameters are presented in
Table 1, where q is the angle about previous z, from old x axis to new x
axis. d is the offset along previous z axis to the common normal. a is the
length of the common normal. Assuming a revolute joint, this is the
radius about previous z axis. α is the angle about common normal, from
old z axis to new z axis.
The forward kinematics model of the 5-DOF manipulator, namely
the homogeneous transformation matrix 50T of coordinate system O5xyz
to coordinate system O0xyz is built as:
nx ox ax px
⎡ ⎤
ny oy ay py
0
5T
⎢
= nz oz az pz ⎥
⎢ ⎥
⎢
⎣0 0 0 1⎥ ⎦ (1)
where
nx = − cos(q5) × (sin(q1) × sin(q4 ) − cos(q1) × cos(q2) × cos(q4 ))
− cos(q1) × sin(q2) × sin(q5)
ny = cos(q5) × (cos(q1) × sin(q4 ) + cos(q2) × cos(q4 ) × sin(q1))
− sin(q1) × sin(q2) × sin(q5)
nz = cos(q2) × sin(q5) + cos(q4 ) × cos(q5) × sin(q2)
ox = sin(q5) × (sin(q1) × sin(q4 ) − cos(q1) × cos(q2) × cos(q4 ))
− cos(q1) × cos(q5) × sin(q2)
oy = − sin(q5) × (cos(q1) × sin(q4 ) + cos(q2) × cos(q4 ) × sin(q1))
− cos(q5) × sin(q1) × sin(q2)
oz = cos(q2) × cos(q5) − cos(q4) × sin(q2) × sin(q5)
ax = cos(q4 ) × sin(q1) + cos(q1) × cos(q2) × sin(q4 )
ay = cos(q2) × sin(q1) × sin(q4 ) − cos(q1) × cos(q4 )
az = sin(q2) × sin(q4 )
W. Wang et al. Automation in Construction 91 (2018) 92–99

Fig. 1. The components of explosive loading machinery.

px = cos(q1) × (a1 + a2 × cos(q2) − (d3 + q3) × sin(q2)) Table 1

py = sin(q1) × (a1 + a2 × cos(q2) − (d3 + q3) × sin(q2)) The parameters of the 5-DOF manipulator.

pz = d1 + a2 × sin(q2) + (d3 + q3) × cos(q2) q(o) d(mm) a(mm) α(o)

where d3 is the length of the baseline of the prismatic joint and q3 is the 1 90 d1 a1 90
change in length from the baseline. 2 90 0 a2 − 90
The transformation matrix t0T of the tool coordinate system Otxyz can 3 0 d3 0 0
4 90 0 0 90
be expressed as: 5 0 0 0 0
t t t
⎡ ax nx ox px + T z × ax + T x × nx + T y × ox ⎤
0 0 5 ⎢ ay ny oy py + T z × ay + T x × ny + T ty × oy ⎥
t t
t T =5 Tt T = ⎢ ⎥ manipulator can be regarded as a group of nonlinear equations to get
t t t
⎢ az nz oz pz + T z × az + T x × nz + T y × oz ⎥ approximate solutions through numerical iteration. Set the target pose
⎢
⎣0 0 0 1 ⎥
⎦ matrix as t0Tdes ∈  4 × 4 , joint angle values for iteration as
(2) q(i) = (q1, q2 , q3, q4 , q5 )T ∈ 5 , and the actual pose matrix derived from
forward kinematics as t0T q(i) ∈  4 × 4 to build the system of nonlinear
2.3. Numerical solution of inverse kinematics equations:

Since the analytical inverse solution for the 5-DOF underactuated

⎧ f0,0 (q1, q2 , q3, q4 , q5) = 0
manipulator is more difficult to obtain, and only the information of Z- ⎪ f (q , q , q , q , q ) = 0
0,1 1 2 3 4 5
axis direction vector and the position of end effector is needed in
⎨ ⋮
practical application, we propose the numerical solution method in- ⎪ f (q , q , q , q , q ) = 0
stead of that based on full pose constraints. Namely kinematics of the ⎩ n, m 1 2 3 4 5 (3)

Fig. 2. The coordinate systems of the hydraulic arm.

94
W. Wang et al.
where f0,0,f0,1,⋯fn,m are the multivariate functions
q = (q1,q2,q3,q4,q5) T, and fn, m =t0 Tq (n, m) −t0 Tdes (n, m) in which
(n,m) is the subscript of the matrix t0Tdes . Set F = (f0,0,f0,1,⋯,fn,m) T. Then
the system of nonlinear equations (Eq. (3)) can be simplified as:
F (q) = 0
Thus, the problem of solving the manipulator's joint angles is
transformed into the solutions of the nonlinear equations to approach
the target matrix through iteration.
In an effort to improve the convergence rate, the minimum allow-
able error is used as the convergence condition. Then we can get the Eq.
(5):
‖F (q)‖ ≤ e
3. Vision- and laser range sensor-based pose modeling for
boreholes
As shown in Fig. 2, the pipe feeding device is mounted at the end of
the manipulator and provides the function of inserting pipes into holes.
In the control process of the robot arm, the control target is to make the
positions and orientations of pipes and holes overlapped. Therefore the
emphasis is on obtaining the boreholes' positions and the plane normal
vector which is a good approximation of the borehole's central axis
vector. Although the holes are distributed on the surface of the
roadway, we assume that the local areas of the holes are flat. And the
compliance of the pipe can, to a certain extent, adapt itself to the de-
viation. Four single-point range lasers are employed to obtain plane
normal vector instead of sophisticated laser radar. The positions of
boreholes are extracted from the images acquired by vision. The spe-
cific programs are as follows.
3.1. Target pose acquisition
The normal vector of the plane with the target hole on it in the tool
t (xh,yh,zh − l) and the Z-axis vector n (a, b, c ) are obtained, which will
coordinate system Oxyz will be acquired through 4 single-point range
lasers mounted on the pipe feeding device, as shown in Fig. 3. The
installation coordinates of the 4 single-point lasers in the tool co-
t
ordinate Oxyz are tPi (xi,yi) respectively. Combined with their measured
distances zi to the target plane, we can get coordinates of 4 points of the
Fig. 3. Target point normal vector acquisition.
Automation in Construction 91 (2018) 92–99
for plane tPi (xi,yi,zi), then are able to calculate the normal vector of the
→
target plane, n (a, b, c ) , by using arbitrary 3 points. The fourth point is
used as a redundant calculation. The normal vector is given in the
following way:
(4) i j k
→
n = x2 − x1 y2 − y1 z2 − z1 = ai + bj + ck
x3 − x1 y3 − y1 z 3 − z1 (6)
where a = (y2 − y1) ×(z3 − z1) −(y3 − y1) ×(z2 − z1), b = (z2 − z1)
×(x3 − x1) −(z3 − z1) ×(x2 − x1) and c = (x2 − x1) ×(y3 − y1)
−(x3 − x1) ×(y2 − y1).
The camera is installed on the pipe feeding device, as shown in
Fig. 4. It is used in image processing to get the borehole's position CPhole
(5)
(xh,yh) in the camera coordinate system. Then through transformation
matrix tc T , the projection coordinate of the hole in plane XOY of tool
coordinate system can be acquired. Because monocular camera cannot
get the target depth information, we can calculate the Z-axis value of
→
the hole through P1 (x1,y1,z1) and n (a, b, c ) to obtain the borehole's
final position Phole (xh,yh,zh) in the tool coordinate system. The equation
t
is given in the following way:
a (x1 − xh) + b (y1 − yh ) + c (z1 − z h) = 0 (7)
where zh can be formulated as:
z h = z1 + (a (x1 − xh) + b (y1 − yh ))/ c (8)
t
Thus, the position of the hole Phole (xh,yh,zh) is obtained, namely the
target position for tool coordinate system origin moving. In the process
of practical application, the vertical distance between the pipe end and
the hole is set as l, then the actual moving target position becomes tPhole
(xh,yh,zh − l). We could control the distance between the pipe end and
the hole just by adjusting the parameter l.
3.2. Construction of target kinematics pose
As mentioned in the previous subsection, the target position tPhole
→
be used to control the manipulator's motion.
nx sx ax px
⎡ ⎤
0T ⎢ ny sy ay py ⎥
t = nz sz az pz ⎥
⎢
⎢
⎣0 0 0 1⎥ ⎦ (9)
0 t→
In the transformation matrix Tt, Phole and n are equal to (px,py,pz)
and (ax,ay,az) respectively. Therefore, through the numerical solution
which only concerns with the target position and Z-axis direction, the
number of equations in Eq. (4) is reduced from 12 to 6, significantly
simplifying the computation.
4. Experiment and improvement
4.1. Test and improvement for the manipulator's motion performances
Given that the position of the end effector had been preset and the
Z-axis direction was straight ahead, we tested the manipulator's up-
down and left-right motions (Fig. 5), as well as forward-backward
motions (Fig. 6) in the workspace. After the test, several improvements
for control algorithm were presented.
1. In order to improve the accuracy of the numerical inverse solution in
Eq. (9), the orientation vector of Z-axis (ax,ay,az) and the target
position (px,py,pz) which are on different scales should be normal-
ized. Because the orientation vector of Z-axis (ax,ay,az) is a unit
vector, it doesn’t need to be normalized. The position errors of X-, Y-
and Z-positions from the target position (px,py,pz), however, should
be normalized through being divided by the two norm. e.g.
ex′ = ex / px des 2 + pydes 2 + pz des 2 for X axis.
95
W. Wang et al.
Fig. 4. Relative position of pipe feeding device and sensors.
2. The selection of the initial values will affect the computational ac-
curacy of the inverse kinematics, especially in the process of large
scale motions. Therefore a large scale motion is divided into several
small steps, and in every step, the target point is recalculated ac-
cording to the new vision and laser data.
4.2. Experiments in simulated scene
The procedure designed for explosive filling is as follows: the ve-
hicle arrives at the specified location and is manipulated to let the
borehole enter the field of view, then the manipulator automatically
adjusts itself to more accurate initial position and orientation according
to the shape of the wall and the position of the borehole. Vision and
laser range sensors capture the borehole's pose, and the pipe inserts into
the hole through visual servo. Emulsion explosives are transported and
filled into the hole. It should be noted that it is hard to realize real-time
visual servo due to the hysteresis of hydraulic system. So the vision
alignment is achieved based on the method of multi-step approach to
the target. The alignment error e in the visual coordinate system is
established as:
e= (x pos − x des )2 + (ypos − ydes )2
(10)
where (xpos,ypos) and (xdes,ydes) are the borehole's positions of measuring
and target respectively, e represents the deviation from the target point
with the allowable accuracy of +/− 2 cm. In an effort to verify the
feasibility of this method, simulated and underground experiments are
carried out respectively.
During the experiment in the simulated scene shown in Fig. 7, we
found that the laser range measurement has good robustness while the
position accuracy of the vision was less acceptable due to the limitation
Fig. 5. Left-right and Up-down motions.
96
Automation in Construction 91 (2018) 92–99
of the manipulator's initial pose and camera focus length. From the
practical application, we design the visual servo as two steps: pre-
alignment and precise alignment, which are implemented from the
following two aspects:
(1) In the pre-alignment, the end pose will be adjusted according to the
sensor information to make pipe perpendicular to the wall, as
shown in Fig. 8, because in this pose the camera is parallel to the
wall and the accuracy of image identification is more precise.
(2) Since the image will be clearer in a certain focal length in the pre-
alignment, the target value of Z axis is set to 800 mm to provide a
clearer image to the next the precise alignment.
Through the adjustment of the above two steps, it can solve the
problem of low positioning accuracy caused by the unclear images,
leading to precise alignment.
4.3. Experiments in the underground mine
Experiments in the underground mine are shown in Fig. 9, and we
found that: (1) Lighting deficiency affected the clarity of image cap-
turing, which would further affect the alignment accuracy. It can be
addressed by mounting auxiliary lighting device on the manipulator.
Meanwhile, the lighting device can also be used for night work. (2) The
planeness of the wall decreased the pre-alignment accuracy. This pro-
blem can be solved by multiple times of precise alignments, namely
keep adjusting until the alignment is within +/− 2 cm, as shown in
Fig. 10. In the primary alignment, the maximum absolute error is
10.01 cm, the minimum is 3.42 cm, while in the secondary alignment,
the maximum is 1.861 cm, the minimum is 0.523 cm. Then the pipe
W. Wang et al. Automation in Construction 91 (2018) 92–99

Fig. 6. Left-right and forward-backward large scale motions.

Fig. 7. Simulated experiment.

Fig. 8. The two-step alignment process of the manipulator.

97
W. Wang et al.
Fig. 9. Underground experiment.
Fig. 10. Accuracy comparison of pre-alignment and precise alignment.
inserts into the hole. In the testing process, 90% of the experiments
were completed by accurate alignment of one time, and the remainder
was also finished by alignments of 2 to 3 times.
5. Conclusion
In this paper, vision and laser range sensors are mounted on the 5-
DOF hydraulic manipulator which is transformed from a crane to rea-
lize the emulsion explosives unmanned filling. The main contribution of
the paper lies in proposing the method for obtaining the poses of
boreholes, as well as the method of numerical solution of inverse
98
Automation in Construction 91 (2018) 92–99
kinematics that only needs information of Z-axis direction vector and
the position of end effector. Experiments for manipulator motion
testing, filling tests in simulated and underground environments are
performed respectively. Yet, from the experimental results, we found
several defects of our method and proposed corresponding solutions.
This approach greatly improved the hydraulic arm's intelligence that
could be extended to a wide range of applications.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by the National High Technology
Research, Development Program of China (863 Program) [grant
number: 2011AA060405] and the National Natural Science Foundation
of China under grant no. 61773141 and 61105088.
References
[1] J. Zhang, W. Li, J. Yu, Q. Zhang, S. Cui, Y. Li, S. Li, G. Chen, Development of a
virtual platform for telepresence control of an underwater manipulator mounted on
a submersible vehicle, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 64 (2) (2017) 1716–1727, http://
dx.doi.org/10.1109/TIE.2016.2557309.
[2] J. Sern, J.L. Martnez, A. Mandow, A.J. Reina, J. Morales, A.J. Garca-Cerezo,
Automation of the arm-aided climbing maneuver for tracked mobile manipulators,
IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 61 (7) (2014) 3638–3647, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/
TIE.2013.2272275.
[3] L. Cantelli, G. Muscato, M. Nunnari, D. Spina, A joint-angle estimation method for
industrial manipulators using inertial sensors, IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatron. 20 (5)
(2015) 2486–2495, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TMECH.2014.2385940.
[4] K.M. Lundeen, S. Dong, N. Fredricks, M. Akula, J. Seo, V.R. Kamat, Optical
marker-based end effector pose estimation for articulated excavators, Autom.
W. Wang et al.
Constr. 65 (2016) 51–64, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2016.02.003.
[5] P. Cheng, B. Oelmann, Joint-angle measurement using accelerometers and gyro-
scopes-a survey, IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas. 59 (2) (2010) 404–414, http://dx.doi.
org/10.1109/TIM.2009.2024367.
[6] A. Martinelli, Vision and IMU data fusion: closed-form solutions for attitude, speed,
absolute scale, and bias determination, IEEE Trans. Robot. 28 (28) (2012) 44–60,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TRO.2011.2160468.
[7] J. Vihonen, J. Honkakorpi, J. Tuominen, J. Mattila, A. Visa, Linear accel-
erometers and rate gyros for rotary joint angle estimation of heavy-duty mobile
manipulators using forward kinematic modeling, IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatron. 21
(3) (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TMECH.2016.2544352 1-1.
[8] K.C. Yong, M. Gai, Projection-recognition-projection method for automatic object
recognition and registration for dynamic heavy equipment operations, J. Comput.
Civ. Eng. 28 (5) (2014) A4014002, http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CP.1943-
5487.0000332.
[9] M.M. Soltani, Z. Zhu, A. Hammad, Automated annotation for visual recognition of
construction resources using synthetic images, Autom. Constr. 62 (2016) 14–23,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2015.10.002.
[10] G. Brooker, R. Hennessey, C. Lobsey, M. Bishop, E. Widzyk-Capehart, Seeing
through dust and water vapor: millimeter wave radar sensors for mining applica-
tions, J. Field Rob. 24 (7) (2007) 527–557, http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/rob.20166.
[11] J. Koivumki, J. Mattila, Stability-guaranteed force-sensorless contact force/motion
control of heavy-duty hydraulic manipulators, IEEE Trans. Robot. 31 (4) (2015)
918–935, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TRO.2015.2441492.
99
Automation in Construction 91 (2018) 92–99
[12] W.H. Hung, C.W. Liu, C.J. Liang, S.C. Kang, Strategies to accelerate the com-
putation of erection paths for construction cranes, Autom. Constr. 62 (2016) 1–13,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2015.10.008.
[13] J.M. Roberts, G.J. Winstanley, P.I. Corke, Three-dimensional imaging for a very
large excavator, Int. J. Robot. Res. 22 (7-8) (2003) 467–478, http://dx.doi.org/10.
1177/02783649030227003.
[14] M. Dunbabin, P. Corke, Autonomous excavation using a rope shovel, J. Field Rob.
23 (6-7) (2006) 379–394, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-33453-8_46.
[15] A.H. Kashani, W.S. Owen, N. Himmelman, P.D. Lawrence, R.A. Hall, Laser
scanner-based end-effector tracking and joint variable extraction for heavy ma-
chinery. Int. J. Robot. Res. 29 (10) (2010) 1338–1352, http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/
0278364909359316.
[16] L.-W. Tsai, A.P. Morgan, Solving the kinematics of the most general six-and five-
degree-of-freedom manipulators by continuation methods, J. Mech. Transm.
Autom. Des. 107 (2) (1985) 189–200, http://dx.doi.org/10.1115/1.3258708.
[17] J. Angeles, Iterative kinematic inversion of general five-axis robot manipulators,
Int. J. Robot. Res. 4 (4) (1986) 59–70, http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/
027836498600400405.
[18] M. Shimizu, Analytical inverse kinematics for 5-DOF humanoid manipulator under
arbitrarily specified unconstrained orientation of end-effector, Robotica 33 (4)
(2015) 747–767, http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0263574714000538.
[19] W. Zhu, B. Mei, Y. Ke, Inverse kinematics solution of a new circumferential
drilling machine for aircraft assembly, Robotica 34 (1) (2016) 98–117, http://dx.
doi.org/10.1017/S0263574714001350.