Event triggering safety guarantee control method and device of teleoperation robot system

Abstract

The invention provides an event triggering safety guarantee control method and device of a teleoperation robot system, and relates to the technical field of teleoperation robot system control. The method comprises the following steps: establishing a teleoperation system with dynamic uncertainty and time delay under security constraints; constructing a virtual reference system for each manipulator in the teleoperation system; based on a virtual reference system, designing event triggering safety guarantee controllers for the master robot and the slave robot respectively, and giving event triggering conditions updated by the master robot controller and event triggering conditions updated by the slave robot quadratic programming problem solving and controller updating; the master robot and the slave robot are synchronized, and it is ensured that the state of the mechanical arm of the slave robot is within the safety set of the mechanical arm of the slave robot. The present invention discusses security critical control issues for teleoperation systems with unknown dynamics, time delays and event trigger mechanisms. Under the design of the invention, the safety of the slave robot in an unknown environment is ensured, and master-slave synchronization is realized.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention relates to the technical field of teleoperated robot system control, and in particular to an event-triggered safety assurance control method and device for a teleoperated robot system. Background Art

[0002] Teleoperation systems are a type of robotic system that transmits commands from a human operator from a local robot (called the master) to a remote robot (called the slave) in order to complete an operational task in a remote environment. In recent years, teleoperation robotic systems have been widely used in various fields such as space and underwater exploration, remote surgery, etc. In teleoperation applications, human operators usually need to perceive the remote environment and move the master robot according to their perception. However, when the slave is working in an unknown environment, if there are multiple position constraints, such as multiple obstacles, the operator's limited sensory feedback may cause them to issue commands that drive the slave robot to contact these obstacles. Therefore, it is crucial to ensure that the slave obeys the master's commands in a safe manner.

[0003] The safety of dynamic systems is usually described using a set of states in which the system evolves. Recently, CBF (Control Barrier Function) has been widely used in safety-critical control through a series of QP (Quadratic Problem), called CBF-QP. However, the formulation of CBF-QP requires an accurate model of the system dynamics, which complicates its application in practical scenarios. In addition, dynamic uncertainty may lead to unsafe or dangerous behaviors, so it is necessary to evaluate and ensure the safety of the system in the presence of system uncertainty.

[0004] To solve the safety-critical control problem of systems with model uncertainties, researchers use offline learning techniques such as neural networks and Gaussian processes to obtain accurate system dynamics and then formulate the safety problem as a CBF-QP. However, this approach is not very real-time and may not produce sufficiently accurate dynamics for the CBF method. Another approach involves the use of adaptive CBF, but this approach requires defining a "penalty term" in the CBF constraints and their corresponding dynamics, making it difficult to apply in practice. The literature (BTLopez, J.-JESlotine, and JPHow, "Robust adaptive controlbarrier functions: An adaptive and data-driven approach to safety," IEEE Control Systems Letters, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 1031–1036, 2020.) proposes a robust safety-critical control method, but it can only handle cases where the uncertainty is unknown additive disturbances.

[0005] For teleoperated robotic systems, especially teleoperations with UAVs as slaves, the safety of slaves has attracted widespread attention from researchers in recent years. The literature (B.Xu and K.Sreenath, "Safe teleoperation of dynamic UAVs through control barrier functions," in 2018IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA). IEEE, 2018, pp. 7848–7855.) proposed a safety zone implemented by an exponential CBF for human operators to remotely operate UAVs using a joystick. A bilateral teleoperation framework for UAVs based on CBF was proposed in the literature (D. Zhang, G. Yang, and R. P. Churshid, “Haptic teleoperation of UAVs through control barrier functions,” IEEE Transactions on Haptics, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 109–115, 2020.), and stability analysis was performed in the literature (D. Zhang and R. Tron, “Stable haptic teleoperation of UAVs via small gain and control barrier functions,” in 2021 IEEE / RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS). IEEE, 2021, pp. 8352–8357.). However, all these works assume that the slave is a UAV with known dynamics. In a generalized teleoperation system (the slave is not necessarily a UAV), it is difficult to obtain the precise dynamics of the master and slave robots due to the inaccuracy of physical parameters and the unavailability of load information. How to ensure that the slave follows the instructions of the host and operates safely in an unknown environment when there is uncertainty in the system is an urgent problem to be solved.

[0006] Applying CBF to actual teleoperated robot systems is an important means to ensure their safety. However, in practical applications, in addition to the design challenges brought by the uncertainty of the robot dynamics model, another challenge is that the solution of the CBF-QP problem cannot be performed continuously. Most works using CBF-QP assume that the system time is discrete and the state remains unchanged in each time interval. Therefore, it is crucial to determine the timing of solving the QP to ensure safety and stability. The literature (G. Yang, C. Belta, and R. Tron, "Self-triggered control for safety critical systems using controlbarrier functions," in 2019 American control conference (ACC). IEEE, Conference Proceedings, pp. 4454–4459.) uses a self-triggering mechanism to determine the next time to solve QP and update the controller, while the literature (AJ Taylor, P. Ong, J. Cortes, and ADAmes, "Safety-critical event: "triggered control via input-to-state safe barrier functions," IEEE Control Systems Letters, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 749–754, 2021.) combines the event triggering mechanism with the concept of input to state safety set. However, all these methods assume that the system dynamics are accurate. In order to solve the event-triggered safety critical control problem of unknown dynamic systems, the literature (W. Xiao, C. Belta, and CGCassandras, "Event-triggered safetycritical control for systems with unknown dynamics," in 202160th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC). IEEE, Conference Proceedings, pp. 540–545.) defines an adaptive affine system, reformulates the safety-critical control problem as a CBF-QP based on an adaptive affine system and error states, and proposes an event triggering mechanism corresponding to stability.This method has also been extended to multi-agent systems in the literature (W. Xiao, C. Belta, and CG Casasandras, "Event-triggered control for safety-critical systems with unknown dynamics," IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 68, no. 7, pp. 4143–4158, 2023.). However, the method proposed in this paper only considers the safety of the system, but ignores the synchronization or consistency between agents, which is not suitable for networked teleoperation systems.

[0007] In a networked teleoperation system, master-slave synchronization is critical to ensure that the slave follows the master's commands and that the master accurately perceives the remote environment. In addition, it is well known that data transmission delays caused by long-distance data transmission can greatly degrade the performance of the teleoperation system. Considering the impact of these delays is critical to ensuring the stability and security of the teleoperation system. Summary of the invention

[0008] In order to solve the safety-critical control problem of a teleoperation system with unknown dynamics, time delay and limited computing resources, an embodiment of the present invention provides an event-triggered safety assurance control method and device for a teleoperation robot system. The technical solution is as follows:

[0009] On the one hand, a method for event-triggered safety assurance control of a teleoperated robot system is provided, the method being implemented by an adaptive control device, the method comprising:

[0010] S1. Establish a teleoperation system with dynamic uncertainty and time delay under safety constraints; wherein the teleoperation system includes a master robot and a slave robot, and the master robot and the slave robot are robotic arms with n degrees of freedom.

[0011] S2. Construct a virtual reference system for each manipulator in the teleoperation system.

[0012] S3. Based on the virtual reference system, design a master robot event trigger controller for the master robot and a slave robot event trigger controller for the slave robot respectively, give the event trigger conditions for updating the master robot event trigger controller and the event trigger conditions for solving the safety-critical quadratic programming problem and updating the controller of the slave robot.

[0013] S4. According to the master robot event triggering controller and the slave robot event triggering controller, the master robot and the slave robot are synchronized, and the conditions for ensuring the stability of the closed-loop system and ensuring that the position of the slave robot is within the safety set are respectively given.

[0014] Optionally, the teleoperation system in S1 is as shown in the following equations (1) and (2):

[0015]

[0016] Where M m / M s represents the inertia matrix of the master / slave robot, q m / q s Indicates the joint positions of the master / slave robots, represents the acceleration vector of the master / slave robot, represents the Coriolis force matrix and centrifugal force matrix of the master / slave robot, Indicates the speed of the master / slave robot, G m / G s represents the gravity of the master / slave robot, represents the Jacobian matrix of the master / slave robot, f m represents the force exerted by the person, τ m / τ s represents the control torque of the master / slave robot, f s represents the environmental force, m represents the master robot, and s represents the slave robot.

[0017] Optionally, constructing a virtual reference system for each manipulator in the teleoperation system in S2 includes:

[0018] A virtual reference system is constructed for each manipulator, as shown in equation (3):

[0019]

[0020] In the formula, represents the acceleration of the virtual reference system i, i = m, s, j = m, s, j ≠ i, m represents the master robot, s represents the slave robot, α i ,β i ,κ i represents a normal number, represents the position signal of the virtual reference system i, represents the velocity of the virtual reference system i, represents an n-dimensional Euclidean space with a vector norm, x j represents the position signal of the virtual reference system j, t represents the time, T j represents the time delay experienced by the signal from the j robot to the i robot, u i Represents the input of the specified virtual reference system.

[0021] Optionally, a slave robot event triggering controller is designed for the slave robot in S3, including:

[0022] Formulate a CBF-QP filter to select the reference input u from the robot s , CBF-QP filter, as shown in the following equations (4) and (5):

[0023]

[0024]

[0025] In the formula, represents an n-dimensional Euclidean space with a vector norm, e s represents the error between the robot's manipulator joint position and the virtual reference system output, Represents φ s The derivative of x s represents the virtual reference position signal from the robot, as shown in formula (3), represents the virtual reference velocity signal from the robot, represents the virtual reference acceleration signal from the robot, γ2>0, v s1 ,...,v sp represents a normal number, and p represents the number of safety constraints.

[0026] in,

[0027]

[0028] In the formula, h s represents the obstacle function that characterizes the safe set of robot motion, T represents the matrix transpose, and γ1>0.

[0029] Assume that the time to solve CBF-QP is event-triggered, record For the CBF-QP filter at the trigger time The solution is:

[0030]

[0031] In the formula, u s (t) represents the input from the robot virtual reference system, represents the event triggering time from the robot QP problem solution and controller update, k s =0,1,…∈N, where N represents a set of non-negative integers,

[0032] Using the proposed synchronization variables, the slave robot event trigger control is defined as follows:

[0033]

[0034] Where τ s represents the controller triggered by the robot event, κ s >0,r s represents the synchronization variable, which is defined by equation (9):

[0035]

[0036] In the formula, λ s is a positive constant parameter, q s is the joint position of the slave robot, Y s for represents the regression matrix from the manipulator model, satisfying:

[0037]

[0038] In the formula, θ s is the unknown parameter vector of the slave manipulator, q s is the joint position of the slave robot, is the joint velocity of the slave robot, is the position error between the slave manipulator and the slave virtual reference system, is the velocity error between the slave manipulator and the slave virtual reference system, Represents θ s The estimate, express The time derivative of is any positive definite matrix.

[0039] The trigger function is shown in the following equations (11) and (12):

[0040]

[0041] In the formula, μ s >0,∈ s >0,v s >0 is a constant parameter, Represents an exponential function:

[0042]

[0043] The trigger condition is shown in the following formula (16):

[0044]

[0045] Optionally, a main robot event triggering controller is designed for the main robot in S3, including:

[0046] Select the virtual reference system (3) as the input to the following equation (17) to generate the reference signal x m , the main robot event trigger controller is designed as follows (18):

[0047] u m =e m (17)

[0048]

[0049] In the formula, u m represents the input of the main reference system, e m represents the error between the manipulator joint position of the master robot and the output of the virtual reference system, τ m represents the main robot event trigger controller, κ m >0,r m Represents the synchronization variable of the master robot, that is, Indicates that the controller satisfies The trigger time series, Y m for represents the regression matrix from the manipulator model, satisfying:

[0050]

[0051] In the formula, θ m The uncertain model parameters of the main manipulator, q m is the joint position of the main manipulator, is the joint speed of the main manipulator, is the velocity error between the main manipulator and the main virtual reference system, Represents θ m The estimate of θ m represents the unknown parameter vector of the master robot, Expressed as The time derivative of m is a positive definite matrix, and T represents the matrix transpose.

[0052] Optionally, the safety set of the robot arm of the slave robot in S4 is as shown in the following equation (20):

[0053]

[0054] In the formula, represents the safe set, q s represents the joint position of the slave robot, represents the multiple barrier function vector, p represents the number of barrier functions, represents p-dimensional Euclidean space. p =[0,…,0] T , T represents matrix transpose.

[0055] Optionally, the method further comprises:

[0056] Provide stability conclusions for closed-loop control systems under the action of master and slave robot controllers, including:

[0057] Theorem 1: If for any given gain α in the virtual reference system (3) m ,β m ,α s ,β s ,κ m ,κ s And any upper bound of delay d m ,d s satisfy:

[0058]

[0059] Among them, δ m >0,δ s >0,l s >0 is an arbitrary constant, μ m >0,μ s >0 is the event trigger parameter, then, for the closed-loop teleoperation system, the following conclusions can be drawn:

[0060] (1) If the teleoperation system under consideration is in a free motion state, that is, the force f applied by the operator m and environmental forces s are all zero, then all signals are bounded, the closed-loop control system is asymptotically stable, and

[0061] Where t represents time, represents the position signal of the virtual reference system i, i = m, s, represents an n-dimensional Euclidean space with a vector norm, represents the velocity of the virtual reference system i, q m / q s represents the joint position of the master / slave robot, e s represents the error between the robot's manipulator joint position and the output from the virtual reference system, e m represents the error between the manipulator joint position of the master robot and the output of the master virtual reference system, Indicates the speed of the master / slave robot.

[0062] (2) If d m , Then all signals are bounded, and express L2 norm space and L infinity norm space.

[0063] (3) There is no Zeno phenomenon in the proposed control scheme.

[0064] Theorem 2: For a closed-loop teleoperation system, if the initial position of the slave robot is within the safety set, that is, At the same time, the operating force and environmental force meet f m , And for some T>0, we have:

[0065]

[0066] Among them, γ2>0, then it can be guaranteed that the slave robot is safe at any time, that is, q s ∈S for all t>0.

[0067] On the other hand, an event-triggered safety assurance control device for a teleoperated robot system is provided, and the device is applied to an event-triggered safety assurance control method for a teleoperated robot system, and the device comprises:

[0068] A module is established for establishing a teleoperation system with dynamic uncertainty and time delay; wherein the teleoperation system includes a master robot and a slave robot, and the master robot and the slave robot are mechanical arms with n degrees of freedom.

[0069] The construction module is used to construct a virtual reference system for each manipulator in the teleoperation system.

[0070] A design module is used to design a master robot event trigger controller for the master robot and a slave robot event trigger controller for the slave robot based on a virtual reference system, and to provide event trigger conditions for updating the master robot event trigger controller and solving the safety-critical quadratic programming problem and updating the controller of the slave robot.

[0071] The output module is used to trigger the controller according to the master robot event and the slave robot event, realize the synchronization of the master robot and the slave robot, and respectively provide conditions to ensure the stability of the closed-loop system and ensure that the position of the slave robot is within the safety set.

[0072] On the other hand, an adaptive control device is provided, comprising: a processor; a memory, wherein the memory stores computer-readable instructions, and when the computer-readable instructions are executed by the processor, any one of the event-triggered safety assurance control methods of the teleoperated robot system described above is implemented.

[0073] On the other hand, a computer-readable storage medium is provided, wherein at least one instruction is stored in the storage medium, and the at least one instruction is loaded and executed by a processor to implement any one of the event-triggered safety assurance control methods of the teleoperated robot system described above.

[0074] The beneficial effects brought about by the technical solution provided by the embodiment of the present invention include at least:

[0075] In the present invention, the master-slave synchronization problem of a teleoperation system with safety constraints, parameter uncertainty and limited computing resources is studied. While ensuring that the slave robot is in the safety set, the entire closed-loop teleoperation system is guaranteed to remain stable and achieve master-slave synchronization. The method combines adaptive control, control obstacle function and event triggering mechanism. In order to ensure the safe synchronization of the robot, the present invention designs a virtual reference system to provide a reference signal for the robot. At the same time, the present invention provides event triggering conditions for solving the CBF-QP problem and updating the controller, and gives theoretical results for ensuring the stability of the closed-loop system and the safety of the slave. The simulation experimental results provided by the present invention demonstrate the effectiveness of the method. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0076] In order to more clearly illustrate the technical solutions in the embodiments of the present invention, the following briefly introduces the drawings required for use in the description of the embodiments. Obviously, the drawings described below are only some embodiments of the present invention. For ordinary technicians in this field, other drawings can be obtained based on these drawings without creative work.

[0077] Figure 1 This is a flow chart of an event-triggered safety assurance control method for a teleoperated robot system provided by an embodiment of the present invention;

[0078] Figure 2 is a safe working area diagram of a slave robot provided by an embodiment of the present invention;

[0079] Figure 3 is the external force F applied by the human operator provided in the embodiment of the present invention hy picture;

[0080] Figure 4 is a joint position diagram of a robot provided by an embodiment of the present invention;

[0081] Figure 5 is a joint velocity diagram of a robot provided by an embodiment of the present invention;

[0082] Figure 6 is an event triggering interval diagram of a master and slave controller provided by an embodiment of the present invention;

[0083] Figure 7 is a robot trajectory diagram in the joint space provided by an embodiment of the present invention;

[0084] Figure 8 It is a block diagram of an event-triggered safety assurance control device for a teleoperated robot system provided by an embodiment of the present invention;

[0085] Fig. 9 It is a structural schematic diagram of an adaptive control device provided by an embodiment of the present invention. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0086] The technical solution of the present invention is described below in conjunction with the accompanying drawings.

[0087] In the embodiments of the present invention, words such as "exemplarily" and "for example" are used to indicate examples, illustrations or explanations. Any embodiment or design described as "example" in the present invention should not be interpreted as being more preferred or more advantageous than other embodiments or designs. Specifically, the use of the word "example" is intended to present the concept in a specific way. In addition, in the embodiments of the present invention, the meaning expressed by "and / or" can be both, or it can be either of the two.

[0088] In the embodiments of the present invention, "image" and "picture" can sometimes be used interchangeably. It should be noted that when the difference between them is not emphasized, the meanings they intend to express are the same. "of", "corresponding, relevant" and "corresponding" can sometimes be used interchangeably. It should be noted that when the difference between them is not emphasized, the meanings they intend to express are the same.

[0089] In the embodiments of the present invention, sometimes a subscript such as W1 may be written as a non-subscript such as W1. When the difference is not emphasized, the meanings to be expressed are the same.

[0090] In order to make the technical problems, technical solutions and advantages to be solved by the present invention more clear, a detailed description will be given below with reference to the accompanying drawings and specific embodiments.

[0091] The embodiment of the present invention provides an event-triggered safety assurance control method for a teleoperated robot system, which can be implemented by an adaptive control device, which can be a terminal or a server. Figure 1 The flowchart of the event-triggered safety assurance control method of the teleoperated robot system shown in the figure may include the following steps:

[0092] S1. Establish a teleoperation system with dynamic uncertainty and time delay under safety constraints.

[0093] The teleoperation system may include a master robot and a slave robot, and the master robot and the slave robot may be robotic arms with n degrees of freedom.

[0094] In a feasible implementation manner, the control obstacle function considered in the present invention is first introduced:

[0095] Consider an affine control system of the following form:

[0096]

[0097] where x, f, g all satisfy local Lipschitz continuity, and u is the control variable. The security of system (1) is determined by a The continuous differentiable function h on is defined as:

[0098]

[0099] Definition 1: For system (1), if from any The initial solution satisfies 0, then the set is a forward invariant. If the set is forward invariant, the system It is safe.

[0100] Definition 2: For system (1), a sufficiently smooth function The relative order of is defined as the number of times it needs to be differentiated along the dynamics of the system for the control variable u to appear explicitly in the corresponding derivative.

[0101] For a relative order m constraint h(x)≥0, define a function sequence i∈{1,…,m} satisfies formula (5):

[0102]

[0103] in i∈{1,…,m},ψ0=h(x).

[0104] Definition 3: Defined by (5) i∈{1,…,m}, for system (1), if there exists a local Lipschitz function So that:

[0105]

[0106] The function h:x→R is called a high-order control barrier function (HOCBF) with a relative order of m.

[0107] For all in L g h are the Lie derivatives of function h along f(x) for m times and g(x) for 1 time respectively; O(·) represents the Lie derivatives along f with the residual order less than or equal to m-1.

[0108] Theorem 1: Given a dynamic system as in (1), and the set i∈{1,...,m} is defined by (5) i If any Lipschitz continuous controller u makes (6) true, then the set is forward invariant, that is:

[0109]

[0110] Further, based on the above preliminary knowledge, the present invention considers a bilateral teleoperation system consisting of two robotic arms with n degrees of freedom:

[0111]

[0112]

[0113] In the formula, They are the joint position, velocity, and acceleration vector of the master / slave robot respectively; is the inertia matrix; are the Coriolis force matrix and the centrifugal force matrix. Represents gravity. is the Jacobian matrix. is the control torque. It is the force exerted by man; Represents environmental force, represents a set of n×m-dimensional real matrices, is a set of real numbers. When i = m, s, the robot systems (8) and (9) have the following properties:

[0114] Property 1: Inertia matrix M i (q i ) is positive definite, and there exists a positive scalar m i1 ,m i2 , so that m i1 I≤M i (q i )≤m 2i I. I represents the identity matrix.

[0115] Property 2:

[0116] Property 3: For all x i ,y i ∈R n , the dynamics of the robot can be linearly parameterized as follows:

[0117]

[0118] in is the regression matrix of the robot model, is an unknown constant vector.

[0119] During teleoperation, there is usually a communication delay in data transmission between the master and slave machines. m ,T s Denote the delays from master to slave and slave to master, respectively. These delays are usually asymmetric and time-varying.

[0120] Assumption 1: For i = m, s, there exists a positive constant d i , communication delay T i Satisfy 0≤T i ≤d i . Moreover, the time delay is differentiable and its derivative is bounded.

[0121] The present invention mainly designs an event-triggered adaptive controller τ for a teleoperation system (8)-(9) with dynamic uncertainty and time delay. i To achieve master-slave synchronization, while ensuring that the slave robot state is within its own safety set, where the safety set is defined as follows:

[0122]

[0123] in, is the multiple barrier function vector, 0 p =[0,…,0] T .

[0124] S2. Construct a virtual reference system for each manipulator in the teleoperation system.

[0125] In a feasible implementation, firstly, the following virtual reference system is constructed for each manipulator (i=m,s,j=m,s,j≠i):

[0126]

[0127] in is the state of the virtual reference system, is the input of the virtual reference system to be specified later, α i ,β i ,κ i They are all normal numbers.

[0128] The idea behind designing a virtual reference system is to specify the desired trajectory for each real robot while driving the virtual system in sync. i Represents the robot joint position q i Output x with virtual system i The error between:

[0129]

[0130] Therefore, the following synchronization variables are proposed for use in control design:

[0131]

[0132] S3. Based on the virtual reference system, design a master robot event trigger controller for the master robot and a slave robot event trigger controller for the slave robot respectively, give the event trigger conditions for updating the master robot event trigger controller and the event trigger conditions for solving the safety-critical quadratic programming problem and updating the controller of the slave robot.

[0133] Optionally, a slave robot event triggering controller is designed for the slave robot in S3, including:

[0134] Since the slave needs to follow the reference signal x s Therefore, in order to ensure the safety of the slave, the slave virtual system must be safe. s (x s ) imposes forward invariance. To this end, the following CBF-QP filter is formulated to select the reference input u s :

[0135]

[0136] in,

[0137]

[0138] And γ1>0,γ2>0 are constants, v s1 ,...,v sp is a normal number.

[0139] QP problems (15)-(17) are equivalent to:

[0140]

[0141] subject to Au s +b≥v s (19)

[0142] in:

[0143]

[0144] It should be noted that in CBF-QP (15)-(17), the safety constraints are imposed on the reference system rather than the actual system. In this way, the QP problem is formulated using the precise knowledge of the reference system model rather than the actual system model, making the QP technically solvable. In practical applications, it is impractical to continuously solve the QP. Therefore, in the present invention, it is assumed that the moment of solving the CBF-QP is event-triggered. This not only saves computing resources, but also improves the applicability of the control framework. In addition, the controller is updated whenever an event triggers the QP solution.

[0145] remember For the optimal problems (15)-(17) at the trigger time The solution of k s =0,1,…∈N, where N represents a set of non-negative integers, Then, there is:

[0146]

[0147] Therefore, using the synchronization variables given in (14), the event-triggered control of the slave is defined as follows:

[0148]

[0149] where κ s >0 is the same as formula (12), is θ s The estimate of Y s That is According to the robot dynamics properties 3:

[0150]

[0151] In order to implement the controller (23), it is necessary to determine the triggering time k s =0,1,..., to solve QP and update the controller. First, define the trigger function:

[0152]

[0153] where μ s >0,∈ s >0,v s >0 is a constant, for have:

[0154]

[0155] Therefore, the trigger conditions are:

[0156]

[0157] Optionally, a main robot event triggering controller is designed for the main robot in S3, including:

[0158] Assume that the main manipulator is freely moved by a human operator, that is, there is no safety constraint on the main manipulator. In this scenario, in order to ensure the position of the main reference frame q m Track the position x of the virtual reference frame m , the input for selecting the main reference system is:

[0159] u m =e m (31)

[0160] To generate the reference signal x m The host's event trigger controller is designed as follows:

[0161]

[0162] In the formula For the controller to meet The trigger time sequence. m >0 is the same as formula (12), is θ m The event triggering conditions are as follows:

[0163]

[0164] where μ m >0,∈ m >0,v m >0 is a scalar,

[0165]

[0166] for It is expressed as:

[0167]

[0168] The present invention provides stability conclusions for closed-loop controllers under the action of master-slave robot controllers.

[0169] Theorem 1: If for any given gain α in the virtual reference system (12) m ,β m ,α s ,β s ,κ s And any upper bound of delay d m ,d s satisfy:

[0170]

[0171] Among them, δ m >0,δs >0,l s >0 is an arbitrary constant. Then, for the closed-loop teleoperation system using controllers (23) and (32) and event triggering mechanisms (30) and (33) under assumption 1, the following conclusions can be drawn:

[0172] (1) If the teleoperation system under consideration is in a free motion state, that is, the force f applied by the operator m and environmental forces s are all zero, then all signals are bounded, the closed-loop control system is asymptotically stable, and

[0173] (2) If Then all signals are bounded, and express L2 norm space and L infinity norm space.

[0174] (3) There is no Zeno phenomenon in the proposed control scheme.

[0175] Furthermore, the present invention provides safety conclusions for closed-loop controllers under the action of master-slave robot controllers.

[0176] The present invention performs the following steps of safety analysis on a teleoperated robot system with unknown dynamics, time lag and limited computing resources:

[0177] Having ensured stability from the above discussion, we now derive the safety conditions for the considered teleoperated robotic system (8)-(9). The goal is to obtain the conditions that make (38) true:

[0178]

[0179] Note that there is a positive Lipschitz constant b s , so that:

[0180] |h s (q s )-h s (x s )|≤b s |e s | (39)

[0181] Further specify:

[0182]

[0183] Using Theorem 2 For any T>0, we have:

[0184]

[0185] Therefore, the following safety conclusions are obtained:

[0186] Theorem 2: For a closed-loop teleoperation system with controllers (23) and (32) and event triggering mechanisms (30) and (33) under Assumption 1, if the initial position of the slave robot is within the safety set, that is, At the same time, the operating force and environmental force meet f m , And for some T>0, we have:

[0187]

[0188] Then, it can be guaranteed that the slave robot is safe at any time, that is, q s ∈S for all t>0.

[0189] Note that the safety of the slave depends on condition (44), which requires that the slave is initially in the safe set and maintains a certain distance from the boundary of the safe set for a certain period of time.

[0190] S4. According to the master robot event triggering controller and the slave robot event triggering controller, the master robot and the slave robot are synchronized, and the conditions for ensuring the stability of the closed-loop system and ensuring that the position of the slave robot is within the safety set are respectively given.

[0191] Furthermore, the present invention provides a simulation verification case.

[0192] The proposed control scheme is applied to a teleoperation system, where the master and slave robots are tandem planar manipulators with 2 degrees of freedom and the following dynamic characteristics (i = m, s):

[0193]

[0194] in p i2 = l i1 l i2 m i2 , p i4 =p i3 / l i2 ,p i5 =(p i1 -p i3 ) / l i1 ,θ i =[p i1 ,p i2 ,p i3 ,p i4 ,p i5 ]T In the simulation, g is set to 9.8 N / kg. The mass is set to m m1 =1.5Kg, m s1 =2.5Kg, m m2 =0.75Kg, m s2 =1.5Kg Joint lengths are l m1 = l s1 =0.5m,l m2 = l s2 =0.3m.

[0195] The safety area of ​​the robot arm is expressed by the function i=1,...,4:

[0196]

[0197] Each function A constraint is introduced in (16) and (17). Specifically, these obstacle functions describe a region in the robot joint space, namely Figure 2 The green area in the figure. The initial state of the robot is selected as: q m (0) = [0.6, -0.4] T ,q m =[0,0] T ,q s (0) = [0.2, 0.2] T , Obviously, both the master and slave are initially within the secure area.

[0198] In the simulation, the communication delay is set to T m =0.2+0.2sin(t),T s =0.3+0.3sin(t). Control parameter selection: α m =α s =3,β m =β s =10,κ m =κ s =10,λ m =λ s =1,γ m =γ s =0.5. The parameter of the event trigger is μ m =μ s =19,∈ m =∈ s =10,v m =v s =1.6. The initial state of the virtual system is set to zero, that is,

[0199] During the simulation process from 2s to 8s, the present invention assumes that a human operator applies a constant force in the y direction of the end effector of the host. That is, f m =[0,1] T F hy , where F hy like Figure 3 As shown in the figure, due to the thrust of the operator, the master will gradually move out of the safe area. Therefore, the present invention studies whether the slave can follow the movement of the master and stay in the safe area under the proposed control scheme. The simulation results are shown in the figure. Figure 4-Figure 6 shown.

[0200] Figure 7 Describes the joints of the master and slave machines in q s1 -q s2 Joint trajectory on the plane. Specifically, it shows that the master moves outside the safety zone due to the external force of the human operator, while the slave is always within the safety zone. Finally, the master and slave achieve synchronization close to the safety zone. Figure 4 The figure shows the change of joint position over time. It can be seen that the master and slave try to synchronize before 2 seconds. In the interval [0,2]s, both robots remain in the safe area. After 2s, due to human power, the master moves outside the safe area (q m2 >1), and the slave tries to follow the master's movement, but does not cross the line At 8 seconds, the operator removed the external force, and the master robot slowly adjusted its position without external force and synchronized with the slave robot. Finally, a consensus was reached at around t = 15 seconds. Figure 5 The event trigger interval of the master and slave controllers is as follows: Figure 6 As shown, it shows that there is no Zeno behavior under the event triggering mechanism.

[0201] In order to solve the safety-critical control problem of teleoperation systems with unknown dynamics, time delays and limited computing resources, the present invention provides a safety filter by defining a master-slave virtual reference system to ensure safety. The virtual reference system also specifies the expected trajectory for the master and slave robots to ensure master-slave synchronization. CBF is defined for the safety requirements of the slave, and the safety-critical control problem of the slave is converted into CBF-QP. The event triggering mechanism for solving the QP problem and the controller update time is further determined to improve the computational efficiency.

[0202] In an embodiment of the present invention, the master-slave synchronization problem of a teleoperation system with safety constraints, parameter uncertainty and limited computing resources is studied. While ensuring that the slave robot is in the safety set, the entire closed-loop teleoperation system is guaranteed to remain stable and achieve master-slave synchronization. The method combines adaptive control, control obstacle function and event triggering mechanism. In order to ensure the safe synchronization of the robot, the present invention designs a virtual reference system to provide a reference signal for the robot. At the same time, the present invention provides event triggering conditions for solving the CBF-QP problem and updating the controller, and gives theoretical results for ensuring the stability of the closed-loop system and the safety of the slave. The simulation experimental results provided by the present invention demonstrate the effectiveness of the method.

[0203] Figure 8 The present invention is a block diagram of an event-triggered safety assurance control device for a teleoperated robot system according to an exemplary embodiment. The device is used in an event-triggered safety assurance control method for a teleoperated robot system. Figure 8 The device includes a building module 310, a construction module 320, a design module 330 and an output module 340. Among them:

[0204] Establishing module 310, for establishing a teleoperation system with dynamic uncertainty and time delay under safety constraints; wherein the teleoperation system includes a master robot and a slave robot, and the master robot and the slave robot are mechanical arms with n degrees of freedom.

[0205] The construction module 320 is used to construct a virtual reference system for each manipulator in the teleoperation system.

[0206] The design module 330 is used to design a master robot event trigger controller for the master robot and a slave robot event trigger controller for the slave robot based on the virtual reference system, and provide event trigger conditions for updating the master robot event trigger controller and solving the safety-critical quadratic programming problem and updating the controller of the slave robot.

[0207] The output module 340 is used to trigger the controller according to the master robot event and the slave robot event to achieve synchronization between the master robot and the slave robot, and to provide conditions for ensuring the stability of the closed-loop system and ensuring that the position of the slave robot is within a safe set.

[0208] In an embodiment of the present invention, the master-slave synchronization problem of a teleoperation system with safety constraints, parameter uncertainty and limited computing resources is studied. While ensuring that the slave robot is in the safety set, the entire closed-loop teleoperation system is guaranteed to remain stable and achieve master-slave synchronization. The method combines adaptive control, control obstacle function and event triggering mechanism. In order to ensure the safe synchronization of the robot, the present invention designs a virtual reference system to provide a reference signal for the robot. At the same time, the present invention provides event triggering conditions for solving the CBF-QP problem and updating the controller, and gives theoretical results for ensuring the stability of the closed-loop system and the safety of the slave. The simulation experimental results provided by the present invention demonstrate the effectiveness of the method.

[0209] Fig. 9 is a schematic diagram of the structure of an adaptive control device provided by an embodiment of the present invention, such as Fig. 9 As shown, the adaptive control device may include the above Figure 8 The event triggering safety assurance control device of the teleoperated robot system is shown. Optionally, the adaptive control device 410 may include a first processor 2001 .

[0210] Optionally, the adaptive control device 410 may further include a memory 2002 and a transceiver 2003 .

[0211] The first processor 2001, the memory 2002 and the transceiver 2003 may be connected via a communication bus.

[0212] Combine the following Fig. 9 The components of the adaptive control device 410 are described in detail:

[0213] The first processor 2001 is the control center of the adaptive control device 410, and may be a processor or a general term for multiple processing elements. For example, the first processor 2001 is one or more central processing units (CPUs), or may be application specific integrated circuits (ASICs), or may be one or more integrated circuits configured to implement the embodiments of the present invention, such as one or more microprocessors (digital signal processors, DSPs), or one or more field programmable gate arrays (FPGAs).

[0214] Optionally, the first processor 2001 may perform various functions of the adaptive control device 410 by running or executing a software program stored in the memory 2002 , and calling data stored in the memory 2002 .

[0215] In a specific implementation, as an embodiment, the first processor 2001 may include one or more CPUs, such as Fig. 9 CPU0 and CPU1 are shown in FIG.

[0216] In a specific implementation, as an embodiment, the adaptive control device 410 may also include multiple processors, such as Fig. 9 The first processor 2001 and the second processor 2004 are shown in FIG. Each of these processors can be a single-core processor (single-CPU) or a multi-core processor (multi-CPU). The processor here can refer to one or more devices, circuits, and / or processing cores for processing data (e.g., computer program instructions).

[0217] The memory 2002 is used to store the software program for executing the solution of the present invention, and is controlled to be executed by the first processor 2001. The specific implementation method can refer to the above method embodiment, which will not be repeated here.

[0218] Optionally, the memory 2002 may be a read-only memory (ROM) or other types of static storage devices that can store static information and instructions, a random access memory (RAM) or other types of dynamic storage devices that can store information and instructions, or an electrically erasable programmable read-only memory (EEPROM), a compact disc read-only memory (CD-ROM) or other optical disc storage, an optical disc storage (including a compressed optical disc, a laser disc, an optical disc, a digital versatile disc, a Blu-ray disc, etc.), a magnetic disk storage medium or other magnetic storage device, or any other medium that can be used to carry or store the desired program code in the form of an instruction or data structure and can be accessed by a computer, but is not limited thereto. The memory 2002 may be integrated with the first processor 2001, or may exist independently, and may be accessed through the interface circuit ( Fig. 9 (not shown) is coupled to the first processor 2001, which is not specifically limited in this embodiment of the present invention.

[0219] The transceiver 2003 is used to communicate with a network device or a terminal device.

[0220] Optionally, the transceiver 2003 may include a receiver and a transmitter ( Fig. 9The receiver is used to implement a receiving function, and the transmitter is used to implement a sending function.

[0221] Optionally, the transceiver 2003 may be integrated with the first processor 2001, or may exist independently and be controlled through the interface circuit ( Fig. 9 (not shown) is coupled to the first processor 2001, which is not specifically limited in this embodiment of the present invention.

[0222] It should be noted that Fig. 9 The structure of the adaptive control device 410 shown in the figure does not constitute a limitation on the router, and the actual knowledge structure recognition device may include more or fewer components than those shown in the figure, or combine certain components, or arrange the components differently.

[0223] In addition, the technical effects of the adaptive control device 410 can refer to the technical effects of the event-triggered safety assurance control method for the teleoperated robot system described in the above method embodiment, which will not be repeated here.

[0224] It should be understood that the first processor 2001 in the embodiment of the present invention may be a central processing unit (CPU), and the processor may also be other general-purpose processors, digital signal processors (DSP), application specific integrated circuits (ASIC), field programmable gate arrays (FPGA) or other programmable logic devices, discrete gate or transistor logic devices, discrete hardware components, etc. The general-purpose processor may be a microprocessor or the processor may also be any conventional processor, etc.

[0225] It should also be understood that the memory in the embodiments of the present invention may be a volatile memory or a non-volatile memory, or may include both volatile and non-volatile memories. Among them, the non-volatile memory may be a read-only memory (ROM), a programmable read-only memory (PROM), an erasable programmable read-only memory (EPROM), an electrically erasable programmable read-only memory (EEPROM), or a flash memory. The volatile memory may be a random access memory (RAM), which is used as an external cache. By way of example and not limitation, many forms of random access memory (RAM) are available, such as static RAM (SRAM), dynamic random access memory (DRAM), synchronous DRAM (SDRAM), double data rate synchronous dynamic random access memory (DDR SDRAM), enhanced synchronous dynamic random access memory (ESDRAM), synchronous link dynamic random access memory (SLDRAM), and direct rambus RAM (DR RAM).

[0226] The above embodiments can be implemented in whole or in part by software, hardware (such as circuits), firmware or any other combination. When implemented by software, the above embodiments can be implemented in whole or in part in the form of a computer program product. The computer program product includes one or more computer instructions or computer programs. When the computer instructions or computer programs are loaded or executed on a computer, the process or function described in the embodiment of the present invention is generated in whole or in part. The computer can be a general-purpose computer, a special-purpose computer, a computer network, or other programmable device. The computer instructions can be stored in a computer-readable storage medium, or transmitted from one computer-readable storage medium to another computer-readable storage medium. For example, the computer instructions can be transmitted from one website, computer, server or data center to another website, computer, server or data center by wired (such as infrared, wireless, microwave, etc.). The computer-readable storage medium can be any available medium that can be accessed by a computer or a data storage device such as a server or data center that contains one or more available media sets. The available medium can be a magnetic medium (for example, a floppy disk, a hard disk, a tape), an optical medium (for example, a DVD), or a semiconductor medium. The semiconductor medium can be a solid-state hard disk.

[0227] It should be understood that the term "and / or" in this article is only a description of the association relationship of associated objects, indicating that there can be three relationships. For example, A and / or B can represent: A exists alone, A and B exist at the same time, and B exists alone. A and B can be singular or plural. In addition, the character " / " in this article generally indicates that the associated objects before and after are in an "or" relationship, but it may also indicate an "and / or" relationship. Please refer to the context for specific understanding.

[0228] In the present invention, "at least one" means one or more, and "more than one" means two or more. "At least one of the following" or similar expressions refers to any combination of these items, including any combination of single or plural items. For example, at least one of a, b, or c can be represented by: a, b, c, ab, ac, bc, or abc, where a, b, c can be single or multiple.

[0229] It should be understood that in various embodiments of the present invention, the size of the serial numbers of the above-mentioned processes does not mean the order of execution. The execution order of each process should be determined by its function and internal logic, and should not constitute any limitation on the implementation process of the embodiments of the present invention.

[0230] Those skilled in the art will appreciate that the units and algorithm steps of each example described in conjunction with the embodiments disclosed herein can be implemented in electronic hardware, or a combination of computer software and electronic hardware. Whether these functions are performed in hardware or software depends on the specific application and design constraints of the technical solution. Professional and technical personnel can use different methods to implement the described functions for each specific application, but such implementation should not be considered to be beyond the scope of the present invention.

[0231] Those skilled in the art can clearly understand that, for the convenience and brevity of description, the specific working processes of the above-described equipment, devices and units can refer to the corresponding processes in the aforementioned method embodiments and will not be repeated here.

[0232] In the several embodiments provided by the present invention, it should be understood that the disclosed devices, apparatuses and methods can be implemented in other ways. For example, the device embodiments described above are only schematic. For example, the division of the units is only a logical function division. There may be other division methods in actual implementation, such as multiple units or components can be combined or integrated into another device, or some features can be ignored or not executed. Another point is that the mutual coupling or direct coupling or communication connection shown or discussed can be through some interfaces, indirect coupling or communication connection of devices or units, which can be electrical, mechanical or other forms.

[0233] The units described as separate components may or may not be physically separated, and the components shown as units may or may not be physical units, that is, they may be located in one place or distributed on multiple network units. Some or all of the units may be selected according to actual needs to achieve the purpose of the solution of this embodiment.

[0234] In addition, each functional unit in each embodiment of the present invention may be integrated into one processing unit, or each unit may exist physically separately, or two or more units may be integrated into one unit.

[0235] If the functions are implemented in the form of software functional units and sold or used as independent products, they can be stored in a computer-readable storage medium. Based on this understanding, the technical solution of the present invention can be essentially or partly embodied in the form of a software product that contributes to the prior art. The computer software product is stored in a storage medium and includes several instructions for enabling a computer device (which can be a personal computer, a server, or a network device, etc.) to perform all or part of the steps of the methods described in various embodiments of the present invention. The aforementioned storage medium includes: various media that can store program codes, such as a USB flash drive, a mobile hard disk, a read-only memory (ROM), a random access memory (RAM), a magnetic disk or an optical disk.

[0236] The above is only a specific embodiment of the present invention, but the protection scope of the present invention is not limited thereto. Any person skilled in the art can easily think of changes or substitutions within the technical scope disclosed by the present invention, which should be included in the protection scope of the present invention. Therefore, the protection scope of the present invention should be based on the protection scope of the claims.

Claims

1. An event-triggered safety assurance control method for a teleoperated robot system, characterized in that: The method comprises: S1. Establishing a teleoperation system with dynamic uncertainty and time delay under safety constraints; wherein the teleoperation system comprises a master robot and a slave robot, and the master robot and the slave robot are mechanical arms with n degrees of freedom; S2, constructing a virtual reference system for each manipulator in the teleoperation system; S3. Based on the virtual reference system, a master robot event trigger controller is designed for the master robot and a slave robot event trigger controller is designed for the slave robot, and event trigger conditions for updating the master robot event trigger controller and solving the safety-critical quadratic programming problem and updating the controller of the slave robot are given; S4. According to the master robot event triggering controller and the slave robot event triggering controller, the master robot and the slave robot are synchronized, and conditions are respectively given to ensure the stability of the closed-loop system and to ensure that the position of the slave robot is within the safety set.

2. The event-triggered safety assurance control method for a teleoperated robot system according to claim 1, characterized in that: The teleoperation system in S1 is as shown in the following equations (1) and (2): Where M m / M s represents the inertia matrix of the master / slave robot, q m / q s Indicates the joint positions of the master / slave robots, represents the acceleration vector of the master / slave robot, represents the Coriolis force matrix and centrifugal force matrix of the master / slave robot, Indicates the speed of the master / slave robot, G m / G s represents the gravity of the master / slave robot, represents the Jacobian matrix of the master / slave robot, f m represents the force exerted by the person, τ m / τ s represents the control torque of the master / slave robot, f s represents the environmental force, m represents the master robot, and s represents the slave robot.

3. The event-triggered safety assurance control method for a teleoperated robot system according to claim 1, characterized in that: The step S2 of constructing a virtual reference system for each manipulator in the teleoperation system includes: A virtual reference system is constructed for each manipulator, as shown in equation (3): In the formula, represents the acceleration of the virtual reference system i, i = m, s, j = m, s, j ≠ i, m represents the master robot, s represents the slave robot, α i ,β i ,κ i represents a normal number, represents the position signal of the virtual reference system i, represents the velocity of the virtual reference system i, represents an n-dimensional Euclidean space with a vector norm, x j represents the position signal of the virtual reference system j, t represents the time, T j represents the time delay experienced by the signal from the j robot to the i robot, u i Represents the input of the specified virtual reference system.

4. The event-triggered safety assurance control method for a teleoperated robot system according to claim 1, characterized in that: The step of designing a slave robot event triggering controller for the slave robot in S3 includes: Formulate a control barrier function based quadratic programming problem CBF-QP filter to select the reference input u from the robot s , the CBF-QP filter is as shown in the following equations (4) and (5): In the formula, represents an n-dimensional Euclidean space with a vector norm, e s represents the error between the robot's manipulator joint position and the virtual reference system output, Represents φ s The derivative of x s represents the virtual reference position signal from the robot, as shown in formula (3), represents the virtual reference velocity signal from the robot, represents the virtual reference acceleration signal from the robot, γ2>0, v s1 ,...,v sp represents a normal number, and p represents the number of safety constraints; in, In the formula, h s represents the obstacle function that characterizes the robot motion safety set, T represents the matrix transpose, γ1>0; Assume that the time to solve CBF-QP is event-triggered, record For CBF-QP filter (4)-(5) at the triggering time The solution is: In the formula, u s (t) represents the input from the robot virtual reference system, represents the event triggering time from the robot CBF-QP problem solution to the controller update, k s =0,1,…∈N, where N represents a set of non-negative integers, Using the proposed synchronization variables, the slave robot event trigger control is defined as follows: In the formula, τ s represents the controller triggered by the robot event, κ s >0,r s represents the synchronization variable, which is defined by equation (9): In the formula, λ s is a positive constant parameter, q s is the joint position of the slave robot, Y s for represents the regression matrix from the manipulator model, satisfying: In the formula, θ s is the unknown parameter vector of the slave manipulator, q s is the joint position of the slave robot, is the joint velocity of the slave robot, is the position error between the slave manipulator and the slave virtual reference system, is the velocity error between the slave manipulator and the slave virtual reference system, Represents θ s The estimate, express The time derivative of is any positive definite matrix, λ s is a positive constant parameter; The trigger function is shown in the following equations (11) and (12): In the formula, μ s >0,∈ s >0,v s >0 is a constant parameter, Represents an exponential function: The trigger condition is shown in the following formula (16):

5. The event-triggered safety assurance control method for a teleoperated robot system according to claim 1, characterized in that: The step of designing a main robot event triggering controller for the main robot in S3 includes: The input of the virtual reference system (3) is selected as the following equation (17), generating the reference signal x m , the main robot event trigger controller is designed as follows (18): the m =and m (17) In the formula, u m represents the input of the master robot virtual reference system, e m represents the error between the manipulator joint position of the master robot and the output of the virtual reference system, that is, e m =q m -x m , τ m represents the main robot event trigger controller, κ m >0,r m Represents the synchronization variable of the master robot, that is, Indicates that the controller satisfies The trigger time series, Y m for represents the regression matrix from the manipulator model, satisfying: In the formula, θ m The uncertain model parameters of the main manipulator, q m is the joint position of the main manipulator, is the joint speed of the main manipulator, is the velocity error between the main manipulator and the main virtual reference system, Represents θ m The estimate of θ m represents the unknown parameter vector of the master robot, Expressed as The time derivative of m is a positive definite matrix, T represents matrix transpose, λ m is a positive constant parameter.

6. The event-triggered safety assurance control method for a teleoperated robot system according to claim 1, characterized in that: The safety set of the robot arm in S4 is as shown in the following formula (20): In the formula, represents the safe set, q s represents the joint position of the slave robot, represents the multiple barrier function vector, p represents the number of barrier functions, represents p-dimensional Euclidean space, 0 p =[0,…,0] T , T represents matrix transpose.

7. The event-triggered safety assurance control method for a teleoperated robot system according to claim 1, characterized in that: The method further comprises: Provide stability conclusions for closed-loop control systems under the action of master and slave robot controllers, including: Theorem 1: If for any given gain α in the virtual reference system (3) m ,β m ,α s ,β s ,κ m ,κ s And any upper bound of delay d m ,d s satisfy: Among them, δ m >0,δ s >0,l s >0 is an arbitrary constant, μ m >0,μ s >0 is the event trigger parameter, then, for the closed-loop teleoperation system, the following conclusions can be drawn: (1) If the teleoperation system under consideration is in a free motion state, that is, the force f applied by the operator m and environmental forces s are all zero, then all signals are bounded, the closed-loop control system is asymptotically stable, and lim t→∞ e m =lim t→∞ e s =0; Where t represents time, represents the position signal of the virtual reference system i, i = m, s, represents an n-dimensional Euclidean space with a vector norm, represents the velocity of the virtual reference system i, q m / q s represents the joint position of the master / slave robot, e s represents the error between the robot's manipulator joint position and the output from the virtual reference system, e m represents the error between the manipulator joint position of the master robot and the output of the master virtual reference system, Indicates the speed of the master / slave robot; (2) If Then all signals are bounded, and lim t→∞ e m =lim t→∞ e s =0; represents f: The L2 norm space and L infinity norm space of ; (3) There is no Zeno phenomenon in the proposed control scheme; Theorem 2: For a closed-loop teleoperation system, if the initial position of the slave robot is within the safety set, that is, At the same time, the operating force and environmental force meet And for some T>0, we have: Among them, γ2>0, then it can be guaranteed that the slave robot is safe at any time, that is, q s ∈S for all t>0.

8. An event-triggered safety assurance control device for a teleoperated robot system, the event-triggered safety assurance control device for a teleoperated robot system being used to implement the event-triggered safety assurance control method for a teleoperated robot system as claimed in any one of claims 1 to 7, characterized in that: The device comprises: An establishment module is used to establish a teleoperation system with dynamic uncertainty and time delay under safety constraints; wherein the teleoperation system includes a master robot and a slave robot, and the master robot and the slave robot are mechanical arms with n degrees of freedom; A construction module, used for constructing a virtual reference system for each manipulator in the teleoperation system; A design module is used to design a master robot event trigger controller for the master robot and a slave robot event trigger controller for the slave robot based on the virtual reference system, and provide event trigger conditions for updating the master robot event trigger controller and solving the safety-critical quadratic programming problem and updating the controller of the slave robot; The output module is used to achieve synchronization between the master robot and the slave robot according to the master robot event triggering controller and the slave robot event triggering controller, and respectively provide conditions for ensuring the stability of the closed-loop system and ensuring that the position of the slave robot is within a safe set.

9. An adaptive control device, characterized in that: The adaptive control device comprises: processor; A memory having computer-readable instructions stored thereon, wherein when the computer-readable instructions are executed by the processor, the method according to any one of claims 1 to 7 is implemented.

10. A computer-readable storage medium, characterized in that: The computer-readable storage medium stores program codes, which can be called by a processor to execute the method according to any one of claims 1 to 7.

Images