Vaishnavi Institute of Technology & Science, Bhopal

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

LABORATORY MANUAL

SUBJECT: ROBOTICS
[SUBJECT CODE: MMMD-207] LAB-II

CLASS: M.TECH (MACHINE DESIGN)

YEAR: 2013-2015

APPROVED BY:

H.O.D. [Mech] PRINCIPAL

Prof. ANIL VISHWKARMA Dr. A.C.VARSHNEY

PREPARED BY: Prof. ANIL K. RAO

 Vaishnavi Institute of Technology & Science, Bhopal

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

List of Experiments

FACULTY: Prof. ANIL K. RAO SUBJECT: ROBOTICS

YEAR: 2013-15 CLASS: M.TECH (MACHINE DESIGN)

1. Demonstration of Cartesian/ cylindrical/ spherical robot.

2. Demonstration of Articulated/ SCARA robot.
3. Virtual modeling for kinematic and dynamic verification any one robotic
. structure using suitable software.
4. Design, modeling and analysis of two different types of grippers.
5. Study of sensor integration.
6. Two program for linear and non-linear path.
7. Study of robotic system design.
8. Setting robot for any one industrial application after industrial visit.
 ROBOTICS LABORATORY MANUAL

EXPERIMENT NO. 1

TITLE: DEMONSTRATION OF CARTESIAN/CYLINDRICAL/SPHERICAL ROBOT

Objective: To study basic robot co-ordinate configurations.

Prelab:
1. Have you seen cartesian/cylindrical/spherical configuration robot?
2. Give any practical example of each of them.

Introduction:
Industrial Robots Definition
A robot is a programmable arm simulator.

A robot is a re-programmable, multifunction manipulator designed to move material,

parts, tools, or special devices through variable programmed motions for the
performance of a variety of tasks

Cartesian Co-Ordinate Robot:

The Cartesian co-ordinate robot is one that consists of a column and an arm. It is
sometimes called an x-y-z robot, indicating the axes of motion. The x-axis is lateral
motion, the y-axis is longitudinal motion, and the z-axis is vertical motion. Thus, the
arm can move up and down on the z-axis; the arm can slide along its base on the x-
axis; and then it can telescope to move to and from the work area on the y-axis. The
Cartesian co-ordinate robot was developed mainly for arc welding, but it is also
suited for many other assembly operations.

Robots with Cartesian configurations consists of links connected by linear joints (L).
Gantry robots are Cartesian robots (LLL). A robot with 3 prismatic joints the axes
consistent with a Cartesian coordinate system.

Commonly used for:

Pick and place work

Assembly operations
Handling machine tools
Arc welding

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

 ROBOTICS LABORATORY MANUAL

Figure 1: Cartesian robot with its rectangular workspace

Advantages:

Ability to do straight line insertions into furnaces.

Easy computation and programming.
Most rigid structure for given length.

Disadvantages:

Requires large operating volume.

Exposed guiding surfaces require covering in corrosive or dusty
environments.
Can only reach front of itself
Axes hard to seal

Cylindrical Co-Ordinate Robot.

The cylindrical co-ordinate robot is a variation of the Cartesian robot. This robot
consists of a base and a column, but the column is able to rotate. It also carries an
extending arm that can move up and down on the column to provide more freedom of
movement. The cylindrical co-ordinate robot is designed for handling machine tools
and assembly.

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

 ROBOTICS LABORATORY MANUAL

Robots with cylindrical configuration have one rotary ( R) joint at the base and linear
(L) joints succeeded to connect the links. A robot with 2 prismatic joints and a
rotary joint the axes consistent with a cylindrical coordinate system.

Commonly used for:

Handling at die-casting machines

Assembly operations
Handling machine tools
Spot welding

Figure 2: Cylindrical robot with its cylindrical workspace

Advantages:

Can reach all around itself

Rotational axis easy to seal
Relatively easy programming
Rigid enough to handle heavy loads through large working space
Good access into cavities and machine openings

Disadvantages:

Can't reach above itself

Linear axes is hard to seal

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

 ROBOTICS LABORATORY MANUAL

Wont reach around obstacles

Exposed drives are difficult to cover from dust and liquids

Spherical Co-Ordinate Robot.

The polar co-ordinate, or spherical co-ordinate robot consists of a rotary base, an

elevation pivot, and a telescoping extend-and-retract boom axis. These robots
operate according to spherical co-ordinates and offer greater flexibility. They are
used particularly in spot welding.

Polar robots have a work space of spherical shape. Generally, the arm is connected
to the base with a twisting (T) joint and rotatory (R) and linear (L) joints follow. A
robot with 1 prismatic joint and 2 rotary joints the axes consistent with a polar
coordinate system.

Commonly used for:

Handling at die casting or fettling machines

Handling machine tools
Arc/spot welding

Figure 3: Spherical robot with its Spherical/Polar workspace

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

 ROBOTICS LABORATORY MANUAL

Advantages:

Large working envelope.

Two rotary drives are easily sealed against liquids/dust.

Disadvantages:

Complex coordinates more difficult to visualize, control, and program.

Exposed linear drive.
Low accuracy.

Conclusion: -
The three basic robot configurations based on co-ordinate system is studied
in details. This will help you in deciding the workspace area of robot for a
particular operation/task and to choose correct type of co-ordinate
configuration of robot for design.
Postlab:
1. Decide suitable robot co-ordinate configuration any seen or unseen
application.
2. Why do you prefer only that particular robot co-ordinate configuration?

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

 ROBOTICS LABORATORY MANUAL

EXPERIMENT NO. 2

TITLE: DEMONSTRATION OF ARTICULATED/SCARA ROBOT

Objective: To study different robot configurations.

Prelab:
1. Have you seen Articulated/SCARA configuration robot?
2. Give any practical example of each of them.

Introduction:
Industrial Robots Definition
A robot is a programmable arm simulator.

A robot is a re-programmable, multifunction manipulator designed to move material,

parts, tools, or special devices through variable programmed motions for the
performance of a variety of tasks

Articulated Robot:

Those with the designation TRR are also called articulated robots. An articulated
robot more closely resembles the human arm.

The jointed-arm is a combination of cylindrical and articulated configurations. The

arm of the robot is connected to the base with a twisting joint. The links in the arm
are connected by rotary joints. Many commercially available robots have this
configuration.

A robot with at least 3 rotary joints.

Commonly used for:

Assembly operations
Welding
Weld sealing
Spray painting
Handling at die casting or fettling machines

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

 ROBOTICS LABORATORY MANUAL

Figure 1: Articulated robot

Advantages:

All rotary joints allows for maximum flexibility

Any point in total volume can be reached.
All joints can be sealed from the environment.

Disadvantages:

Extremely difficult to visualize, control, and program.

Restricted volume coverage.
Low accuracy

SCARA Robot:

The SCARA (Selective Compliance Assembly Robot Arm) is a cylindrical type, whose
reach is obtained by using a revolute, instead of a prismatic joint. SCARA robot is
suitable for assembly operation and is therefore extensively used in several
industries for this purpose.

A robot with at least 2 parallel rotary joints.

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

 ROBOTICS LABORATORY MANUAL

Commonly used for:

Pick and place work

Assembly operations

Figure 2: SCARA robot with its workspace

Advantages:

High speed.
Height axis is rigid
Large work area for floor space
Moderately easy to program.

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

 ROBOTICS LABORATORY MANUAL

Disadvantages:

Limited applications.
2 ways to reach point
Difficult to program off-line
Highly complex arm

Conclusion: -
These two configurations apart from three basic robot configurations based
on co-ordinate system are for the advanced usages. This will help you in
deciding the workspace area of robot for a particular operation/task and to
choose correct type of co-ordinate configuration of robot for design.
Postlab:
1. Decide suitable robot co-ordinate configuration any seen or unseen
application.
2. Why do you prefer only that particular robot co-ordinate configuration?

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

 ROBOTICS LABORATORY MANUAL

EXPERIMENT NO. 3

TITLE: VERTUAL MODELING FOR KINEMATIC AND DYNAMIC

VERIFICATION ANY ONE ROBOTIC STRUCTURE USING SUITABLE
SOFTWARE

Objective: To verify the inverse kinematic and inverse dynamic modeling of one-link
arm or two-link arm as robotic structure using MATLAB.

Prelab:
1. Do the inverse kinematic and dynamic virtual modelings for one or two-link
arm robot/manipulator.
2. How much did you cope with MATLAB?

Introduction:
To verify the inverse kinematic and inverse dynamic modeling of one the
simple robotic structure MATLAB program is written. MATLAB programming is one
of the best ways to verify the problems.

Figure 1: Kinematics of three-link planer arm

Prog.1) Referring above Fig.1, the input homogeneous matrix, T is given as [1/2,-
3/2,0, 3+5/2; 3/2,1/2,0, 3/2+1;0,0,1,0;0,0,0,1] where =60, and the non-zero
constant DH parameters from table a1=a2=2 units, and a3=1 unit. C2=0.866 and

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

 ROBOTICS LABORATORY MANUAL

s2=0.5, which yields 2=30. S1=0 and c1=1. Value of joint angle 1 is obtained as
1=0. Finally, 3=30.

Table: DH parameters of the three-link arm

Link bi i ai i
1 0 1 a1 0
2 0 2 a2 0
3 0 3 a3 0
is Joint Variable.

In order to solve above example, a MATLAB program is written, as shown below,

which can be stored in a file that can be run to yield the above results.

% Program for inverse kinematics of 3-link arm

% Non-zero constant DH parameters.
a1=2;a2=2;a3=1;
%Input
Phi=pi/3;px=2.5+sqrt(3);py=1+sqrt(3)/2;

%Intermediate Calculations
wx=px-a3*cos(phi); wy=py-a3*sin(phi); del=wx*wx+wy*wy;

%Calculations for theta_2

c2=(del-a1*a1-a2*a2)/(2*a1*a2); s2=sqrt(1-c2*c2);
th21=atan2(s2,c2); th22=atan2(-s2,c2);

%Calculation for finding theta_1

s11=((a1+a2*cos(th21))*wy-a2*s2*wx)/del;
c11=((a1+a2*cos(th21))*wx-a2*s2*wy)/del;
s12=((a1+a2*cos(th22)) *wy+a2*s2*wx)/del;
c12=((a1+a2*cos(th22)) *wx+a2*s2*wy)/del;
th11=atan2(s11,c11); th12=atan2(s12,c12);

%Calculation for theta_3

th31=phi-th11-th21; th32=phi-th12-th22;

%Angles in degree
r2d=180/pi;

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

 ROBOTICS LABORATORY MANUAL

th11d=th11*r2d, th12d=th12*r2d, th21d=th21*r2d, th22d=th22*r2d,

th31d=th31*r2d, th32d=th32*r2d,

Prog.2) For the two-link manipulator as shown in figure 2, consider a1=a2=1, and the
joint angle variations for both joints, 1 and 2, are taken being the same as per
equations except that their end conditions are different, i.e. 1(T)=pi and
2(T)=pi/2. Using the MATLAB program shown below, the joint angle and torque
plots can be obtained.

Figure 2: A two-link robot arm

% Inverse dynamics for Two-Link Manipulator

% Input for trajectory and link parameters
T=10; th1T=pi; th10=0; th2T=pi/2; th20=0;
m1=1; a1=1; m2=1; a1=1; a2=1 ; g=9.81;
con = 2*pi/T; delth1=th1T-th10; delth2=th2T-th20; iner21=m2*a1*a2;

for i=1:51,
ti(i)=(i-1)*T/50; ang=con*ti(i);

%Joint trajectory
th1(i)=th10+(delth1/T)*(ti(i)-sin(ang)/con);
th1d(i)=delth1*(1-cos(ang))/T; th1dd(i)=delth1*con*sin(ang)/T;
th2(i)= th20+(delth2/T)*(ti(i)-sin(ang)/con);

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

 ROBOTICS LABORATORY MANUAL

th2d(i)= delth2*(1-cos(ang))/T; th2dd(i)=delth2*con*sin(ang)/T;

thdd=[th1dd(i), th2dd(i)];

%Inertia matrix
sth2=sin(th2(i)); cth2=cos(th2(i));
i22=m2*a2*a2/3; i21=i22+iner21*cth2/2; i12=i21;
i11=i22+m1*a1*a1/3+m2*a1*a1+iner21*cth2;
im=[i11,i12,i21,i22]

%h-vector
h1=-(m2*a1*a2*th1d(i)+iner21/2*th2d(i))*th2d(i)*sth2;
h2=iner21/2*sth2*th1d(i)*th1d(i); hv=[h1,h2]

%gamma-vector
cth1=cos(th1(i)); cth12=cos(th1(i)+th2(i));
gam1=m1*g*a1/2*cth1+m2*g*(a1*cth1+a2/2*cth12);
gam2=m1*g*a2/2*cth12; gv=[gam1,gam2]

%Joint torque
tau=im*thdd+hv+gv; tor1(i)=tau(i); tor2(i)=tau(2);
end
plot(ti,th1,-,ti,th2,:)
figure
plot(ti,tor1,-,ti.tor2,:)

Conclusion: -
One of the critical modeling as inverse kinematics and dynamics of one or
two-link arm manipulator is can be verified with ease using MATLAB software.
It takes less time to verify and gives better understanding too.
References:-
Introduction to Robotics by S.K. Saha-Tata McGraw Hill Inc.

Postlab:
1. Are you able to do it for more number of links?
2. Model some more structure and then verify it using MATLAB.

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

 ROBOTICS LABORATORY MANUAL

EXPERIMENT NO. 4

TITLE: DESIGN, MODELING AND ANALYSIS OF TWO DIFFERENT TYPES OF

GRIPPERS

Objective: To design and verify by modeling and analysis of two different robotic
grippers.

Prelab:
1. What are the different types of grippers?
2. Review of modeling and analysis of 3 D parts.

Introduction:
The design of the end-of-arm tooling for a robotic assembly system is very
important for reducing errors and decreasing cycle times. This is the piece of the
robotic parts handler or assembler that physically interacts with the environment.
While many factors may be blamed for the common failures of workcells, the culprit
is very often the grippers. Well designed grippers can increase throughput, improve
system reliability, compensate for robot inaccuracy, and perform value added
functions to the assembly.

Design:-
In order to design robot we need to consider the gripping force of the robot
end-effectors to grip the object without slippage.

Model 1:
A simple pivot-type gripper is used to hold boxes as shown following figure.
The gripping force, Fg required is 20 kgf. The gripper is to be actuated by a piston
device to apply an actuating force, Fa. The corresponding lever arms for the two
forces are shown in the figure.
Taking moments of the forces on one arm and summing them to zero, we get,

Fg lg = Fa la
Or, Fa = Fg lg
lg
= 20 x 20 = 80 kgf.
5

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

 ROBOTICS LABORATORY MANUAL

Figure: Pivot type gripper

Therefore, the piston device would have to provide an actuating force of 80

kgf to close the gripper with a force against the boxes of 20 kgf.

Model 2:
A block of weight having 1400 N is to be gripped as shown in figure. Find the
clamping force assuming a safety factor 2. Assume coefficient of friction = 0.2.
The centre of gripping does not coincide with the centre of gravity.

Figure: gripper for clamping force

Assuming acceleration a upward,

Resolving vertical forces 1400 + 2 F2 = 2 F1 (Wa/g)
Resolving moments about P, 50 F2 = (1400 x 250)/2

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

 ROBOTICS LABORATORY MANUAL

Or, F2 = (1400 x 250)/(50 x 2) = 3500 N.

Therefore, F1 = 5600 N [assuming a = 2g]
Clamping force = (F1 + F2) x safety factor /
= (9100 x 2) / 0.2 N
= 91000 N
This is greater than the value for gripping at the C.G. If the block is to be lifted by
holding it at the C.G. of the block, the gripping force will be less.

Modeling:-
Modeling of different robot grippers is done using suitable modeling software
like Solid Edge, Pro-Engineer or Catia V5 for example see 3 D figure.

Figure 1: Gripper Approaching Part from Side

Analysis:-
Modeled robotic gripper is analyzed for the regions where the maximum
stresses are generated. The region of max stresses is to be considered as a region
of probability of failure. The crack propagation may from the same location where
there is maximum stresses and hence chances of failure. This failure region can be
detected/analyzed through the analysis software like ANSYS or ABAQUS

Conclusion: -
Two different types of grippers are designed and modeled using CAD
software. Further it is analyze for maximum stresses using Analysis software
(ANSYS).

Postlab:
1. Design grippers considering its types i.e. Electrical, Pneumatic, Hydraulic?
2. Analyze the grippers for max stresses and strains.

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

 ROBOTICS LABORATORY MANUAL

EXPERIMENT NO. 5

TITLE: STUDY OF SENSOR INTEGRATION

Objective: To study the theory of sensory integration.

Prelab:
1. What do you know about Sensory Integration (SI)?
2. What are the application areas of SI?

Introduction:
We would like to talk about What is Sensory Integration? Although this
seems like an obvious question, it is important to define what is and what is not
sensory integration as many research studies purport to use SI, yet the
modifications of treatment are so substantial as to make one question whether the
procedures truly are sensory integrative.

Characteristics of Sensory Integration Procedures:

active participation
child directed
individualized treatment
purposeful activity
need for adaptive response3
input varies based on childs response
activity rich in proprioceptive, vestibular and tactile input
implied or stated goal of improving processing and organization of sensation
(not the teaching of specific skills)
administered by a trained therapist (OT or PT)

Thus, studies which involve pure sensory stimulation such as that of controlled,
systematically applied vestibular stimulation (e.g., the work of Kantner) should not
be grouped with those of sensory integration. Similarly, perceptual motor programs
which tend to be preplanned, therapist directed, structured programs should be
considered separately. The distinction is not always clear-cut since some studies
combine sensory integration and perceptual motor procedures. For example, Huff
and Harris in their study with 34 mentally retarded adults utilized sensory
integration activities but in a specified sequence. In their study, each treatment
session was divided into four areas: CNS normalization (excitation or inhibition),

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

 ROBOTICS LABORATORY MANUAL

sensory stimulation, reflex inhibition and gross motor activity, and visual motor
activity. Thus, treatment was substantially more structured than in sensory
integration, and was therapist directed rather than therapist guided.

Even among the experts, there is not clear agreement as to what is considered to be
sensory integration. In his review of SI research, Ottenbacher included the studies
by DePauw and by Montgomery and Richter whereas Clark and Pierce did not. On the
other hand, Clark and Pierce and Ottenbacher include the study by Magrun in their
review of SI research even though the therapy program consisted of 3 therapist
designed activities from which the client chooses.
However, despite this problem, the importance of clearly defining Sensory
Integration is of particular importance since reviewers of studies of sensory
integration effectiveness often have included research studies in which treatment
violated so many of the principles of sensory integration procedures. Although the
treatment may have drawn upon SI theory, it was not sensory integration therapy.

Are Sensory Integration Procedures Effective?

The next issue we would like to address deals with what the literature says
about the effectiveness of sensory integration procedures. Since 1980, there have
been 7 articles which have reviewed the sensory integration effectiveness
literature. These are listed in the first part of your bibliography. Examination of
these reviews and other related literature indicates that at present, there is not
consistent agreement regarding the effectiveness of sensory integration. Clinicians
who are using sensory integration procedures are convinced that it is effective.

In 1986, Florence Clark and Doris Pierce presented a literature review on SI and
other relevant treatment effectiveness studies specifically carried out with
pediatric populations by occupational therapy researchers. The twenty-six studies
found included research with large samples as well as single-subject designs.
Thirteen of the studies examined the effectiveness of sensory integration
procedures as their independent variable, four examined the effect of
systematically applied vestibular stimulation, four of multisensory input, and five of
perceptual motor training. Given these numbers of studies, it becomes apparent that
occupational therapy efficacy research in this area is progressing, although slowly.

Why and How Does Sensory Integration Work ?

We would next like to discuss the issue of why and how sensory integration
procedures are effective. In sensory integration theory, we hypothesize that we are

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

 ROBOTICS LABORATORY MANUAL

influencing brain organization and brain change. The idea that the neural
organization is actually changing or developing as a result of the sensory
input/adaptive response is controversial. Brain change in humans is nonobservable
and thus, it is very difficult to establish support for it. In demonstrating the
effectiveness of sensory integration, we are primarily limited to observable
behaviors. Brain change can be inferred only from indirect observable variables, such
as change in a childs performance; it cannot be easily directly observed except,
perhaps, through autopsy.

There is some possible support for the effect of sensory integration therapy on
change in the nervous system. In a study by Kawar, findings suggested that sensory
integration therapy positively influenced hemispheric specialization as measured by a
dichotic listening task in a sample of children with learning disabilities. Ottenbacher
demonstrated change in postrotary nystagmus, as measured by the Southern
California Postrotary Nystagmus Test (SCPNT), with multiple measurements of 3
children over a 20-week treatment period. However, as Ottenbacher noted, many
factors contribute to postrotary nystagmus (PRN) as tested with the SCPNT, thus it
is not clear whether or not the PRN change was due to change in central nervous
system physiology or to other factors.

Factors Influencing the Effectiveness of Therapy :

In sensory integration research, a significant amount of effort has been
devoted to trying to identify which children will respond to SI procedures. Much
attention has been directed toward examining factors related to qualities of the
patient or client, for example the childs age, the diagnosis the degree of
responsiveness to certain kinds of sensory input. For example, learning disabled
children who show a shortened duration of postrotary nystagmus appear to improve
to a greater degree from SI treatment than those children who do not show this
type of dysfunction. Following are some of the variables which may influence a childs
response to therapy. These can be categorized as treatment variables, patient
variables, and therapist variables.

Variables Which May Influence Response to Therapy:

Treatment variables: sequence of kinds of sensory input; therapist induced vs.
child induced stimulation
Patient variables: age, sex, diagnosis, severity
Therapist variables: sex, personality, expectations

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

 ROBOTICS LABORATORY MANUAL

Variables which influence the response to therapy can be examined in a number of

ways:1) through observation of treatment, 2) through theory, and 3) through
controlled testing. Let us take the example using the variable of the childs age.
Through working with children of a variety of ages, we may clinically observe
through treatment that children that make the most rapid gains in therapy are
children who have not yet entered school, thus primarily children under 6. We may
draw upon theories of brain plasticity which would indicate that the younger the
child, the more plastic the brain, and since we feel we are influencing brain function,
we may hypothesize that SI would be most effective with younger children. Finally,
we may carry out controlled testing specifically to examine age effects, or, we may
review the literature, in a meta-analysis, and examine the effect of age on outcome.

Conclusion: -
Here the Sensory Integration (SI) therapy is studied which is very important
and effective for the treatments. This concept is still a field of development and
hence need to be well researched.

Reference:-
Sharon A. Cermak, The Efficacy of Sensory Integration Procedures, 1990
issues of Sensory Integration Quarterly.
Postlab:
1. What is your opinion about the area?
2. Do you have any idea of/for the concept or the area where the concept has to
be applied?

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

 ROBOTICS LABORATORY MANUAL

EXPERIMENT NO. 6

TITLE: TO PROGRAM FOR LINEAR AND NON-LINEAR PATH

Objective: To study the VAL language programming for linear and non-linear path.

Prelab:
1. What are different robot languages?
2. What are the different trajectory paths possible of robot manipulator?

Introduction:
VAL Language:
VAL is a popular textual robot language developed by Unimation Inc. for the
PUMA series of robots. VAL has been upgraded to VAL II system with more
interlocking facilities. Victor Sheinman developed VAL language. VAL is very user-
friendly. It provides arm movement in joint, world and tool coordinates, gripping and
speed control. WAIT and SIGNAL commands can be given to implement a specific
task. The commands are subroutines written in BASIC and translated with the aid of
an interpreter. Compiled BASIC has more flexibility.

Following are the two programs which are written for specific tasks and they are
with linear and non-linear paths of manipulator.

Depalletizing:
In a pallet objects protruding 40 mm from the face of the pallet are located
in a number of rows and columns. The pallet has 3 rows that are 30 mm apart and 4
columns that are 50 mm apart. The plane of the pallet is assumed to be parallel to
the X-Y plane. The rows are parallel to X-axis and the columns are parallel to Y-axis.
The objects are to be picked up one after another from the pallet and placed in a
location of sliding channel (chute). Figure 1 indicates the pallet.

PROGRAM DEPALLET 1
REMARK PROGRAM TO PICK OBJECTS FROM A PALLET
REMARK CORNER AND CHUTE LOCATIONS ARE TAUGHT
SETI MAXCOL = 4
SETI MAXROW = 3
SETI ROW = 1
SETI COLUMN = 1

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

 ROBOTICS LABORATORY MANUAL

SET PICK = CORNER

SHIFT PICK BY 20.00, -20.00, 60.00
OPENI
10 MOVE PICK
DRAW 0,0,-25.00
CLOSEI
DRAW 0,0,25.00
MOVE CHUTE
OPENI
GOSUB PALLET
IF ROW LE MAXROW THEN 10
END
PRPGRAM PALLET
REMARK SUBROUTINE FOR LOCATIONS
SETI COLUMN = COLUMN + 1
IF COLUMN GT MAXCOL THEN 20
SHIFT PICK BY 50.00,0.00,0.00
GO TO 10
20 SETI ROW = ROW + 1
IF ROW GT MAXROW THEN 30
SHIFT PICK BY -150.00, -30.00, 0.00
SETI COLUMN = 1
30 RETURN
END

The weld trajectory:

A weldment is to be made as shown in figure 2. The weld trajectory is a
continuous path arc welding along the paths X2-X3 with triangular weaving, X3-X4
with straight weld, X4-X5-X6 with circular interpolation, X6-X7 with straight weld,
X7-X8-X9 with circular arc, X9-X10 with straight weld and X10-X11 with five point
weaving. The weld torch begins its movement from home position X1 and departs to
location X12. Craterfilling is done at the end of trapezoidal weaving. Write a VAL
program for suitable arc welding.

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

 ROBOTICS LABORATORY MANUAL

Figure 1: Depalletizing

PRPGRAM WELD CURVE

1 WSET 1 = 10, 40, 50
2 WSET 2 = 8, 35, 60
3 WSET 3 = 12, 40, 55
4 WVSET 1 = 5, 5
5 WVSET 2 = 10, 7, 2, 0, 1, 2, 0
6 MOVE X1
7 MOVE X2
8 WSTART 1,1
9 MOVE X3
10 WEND 0.5
11 WSTART 2
12 MOVES X4

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

 ROBOTICS LABORATORY MANUAL

13 CIRCLE X4, X5, X6

14 MOVES X7
15 CIRCLE X7, X8, X9
16 MOVES X10
17 WEND 0.5
18 WSTART 3, 2
19 MOVES X11
20 CRATERFILL 0.8, 3
21 WEND 0.5
22 MOVE X12
END

Figure 2: The weld trajectory

Conclusion: -
One of the Robot Programming Languages (RPL) i.e. VAL language is used for
linear and non-linear paths and which is collectively, found easier way of
programming.

Reference:-
ROBOTICS TECHNOLOGY AND FLEXIBLE AUTOMATION by S. R. Deb, Tata
McGraw-Hill Publication Company Ltd.

Postlab:
1. Write programs for applications comprising linear and non-linear paths.

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING