Event-triggered safety assurance control method and device for teleoperated robotic system

Abstract

The application provides an event-triggered 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 safety constraints; constructing a virtual reference system for each manipulator in the teleoperation system; based on the virtual reference system, designing an event-triggered safety guarantee controller for the master and slave robots respectively, giving an event-triggered condition for the master robot controller update and an event-triggered condition for the slave robot quadratic programming problem solution and controller update; realizing the synchronization of the master and slave robots, and ensuring that the state of the manipulator of the slave robot is located in the safety set of the manipulator of the slave robot. The application discusses the safety key control problem of the teleoperation system with unknown dynamics, time delay and event-triggered mechanism. Under the design of the application, the safety of the slave robot in the unknown environment is ensured, and the master-slave synchronization is realized.

Description

TECHNICAL FIELD

[0001] The present application relates to the technical field of teleoperation robot system control, in particular to an event-triggered safety guarantee control method and device for a teleoperation robot system. BACKGROUND

[0002] Teleoperation system is a kind of robot system, which transmits the command of human operator from a local robot (called master) to a remote robot (called slave) in order to complete the operation task in the remote environment. In recent years, teleoperation robot system has been widely applied in various fields such as space and underwater exploration, remote surgery, etc. In teleoperation application, human operator usually needs to perceive the remote environment and move the master robot according to his own perception. However, when the slave works in an unknown environment, if there are multiple position restrictions such as multiple obstacles, the limited sensory feedback of the operator may cause them to issue commands to drive the slave robot to contact these obstacles. Therefore, it is crucial to ensure that the slave robot complies with the master's command in a safe manner.

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

[0004] To solve the safety-critical control problem of systems with model uncertainty, 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 method is not real-time and may not produce sufficiently accurate dynamics for the CBF method. Another approach involves using adaptive CBF, but this method requires defining a "penalty term" in the CBF constraint and its corresponding dynamics, making it difficult to apply in practice. The literature (B. T. Lopez, J.-J. E. Slotine, and J. P. How, "Robust adaptive control barrier 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 only handles the case where the uncertainty is unknown additive disturbance.

[0005] For teleoperation robotic systems, especially the teleoperation systems with drones as slaves, the safety of the slave has attracted extensive attention from researchers in recent years. (B. Xu and K. Sreenath, "Safe teleoperation of dynamic UAVs through control barrier functions," in 2018 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA). IEEE, 2018, pp. 7848-7855.) proposed a safety zone implemented by an exponential CBF for a human operator to remotely operate a drone using a joystick. (D. Zhang, G. Yang, and R. P. Khurshid, "Haptic teleoperation of UAVs through control barrier functions," IEEE Transactions on Haptics, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 109-115, 2020.) proposed a CBF-based bilateral teleoperation framework for drones and the stability analysis was conducted in (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 drone with known dynamics. In a generalized teleoperation system (the slave is not necessarily a drone), it is difficult to obtain the accurate dynamics of the master-slave robots due to the inaccuracy of physical parameters and the unavailability of load information. How to ensure the safe operation of the slave in the unknown environment following the instructions of the master in the presence of system uncertainties is a problem that needs to be solved.

[0006] The application of CBF to practical teleoperated robotic systems is an important means to guarantee their safety. However, in practical applications, in addition to the design challenge brought by the uncertainty of the robot dynamics model, another challenge is that the solution of the CBF-QP problem cannot be continuously performed. Most works using CBF-QP assume that the system time is discrete and the state remains constant within 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 control barrier functions,” in 2019 American control conference (ACC). IEEE, Conference Proceedings, pp. 4454–4459.) uses a self-triggered mechanism to determine the time for the next QP solution and controller update, while the literature (A. J. Taylor, P. Ong, J. Cortes, and A. D. Ames, “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 an event-triggered mechanism with the concept of input-to-state safe set. However, all these methods assume that the system dynamics are accurate. To solve the event-triggered safety-critical control problem for unknown dynamic systems, the literature (W. Xiao, C. Belta, and C. G. Cassandras, “Event-triggered safety critical control for systems with unknown dynamics,” in 2021 60th 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 the adaptive affine system and error state, and proposes an event-triggered mechanism corresponding to stability.This method is also extended to multi-agent systems in the literature (W. Xiao, C. Belta, and C. G. Cassandras, “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 literature only considers the safety of the system, ignoring the synchronization or consensus between agents, which is not suitable for networked teleoperation systems.

[0007] In networked teleoperation systems, master-slave synchronization is crucial to ensure that the slave robot follows the commands of the master robot and that the master robot accurately perceives the remote environment. In addition, it is well known that data transmission delays caused by long-distance data transmission can greatly reduce the performance of teleoperation systems. Considering the impact of these delays is crucial to ensure the stability and safety of teleoperation systems. SUMMARY

[0008] To solve the safety-critical control problem of teleoperation systems with unknown dynamics, time delays, and limited computational resources, embodiments of the invention provide an event-triggered safety guarantee control method and device for a teleoperation robot system. The technical solution is as follows:

[0009] In one aspect, an event-triggered safety guarantee control method for a teleoperation robot system is provided, which is implemented by an adaptive control device. The method includes:

[0010] S1, a teleoperation system with dynamic uncertainty and time delay under safety constraints is established; 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.

[0011] S2, a virtual reference system is constructed for each manipulator in the teleoperation system.

[0012] S3, based on the virtual reference system, a master robot event-triggered controller is designed for the master robot and a slave robot event-triggered controller is designed for the slave robot, and the event-triggered condition for updating the master robot event-triggered controller and the event-triggered condition for solving the slave robot safety-critical quadratic programming problem and controller update are given.

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

[0014] Optionally, in S1, a teleoperation system is configured as follows (1) (2):

[0015]

[0016] In the formula, M m / M s represents the inertia matrix of the master / slave robot, q m / q s represents the joint position of the master / slave robot, represents the acceleration vector of the master / slave robot, represents the Coriolis force matrix and centrifugal force matrix of the master / slave robot, represents the velocity 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 applied by the human, 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, in S2, a virtual reference system is constructed for each manipulator in the teleoperation system, including:

[0018] A virtual reference system is constructed for each manipulator, as shown in the following formula (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 vector norm, x j represents the position signal of the virtual reference system j, t represents time, T j represents the time delay experienced by the signal transmitted from the j manipulator to the i manipulator, u i represents the input of the specified virtual reference system.

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

[0022] Develop a CBF-QP filter to select from the robot's reference input u. s The CBF-QP filter is shown in equations (4) and (5) below:

[0023]

[0024]

[0025] In the formula, Let e ​​represent an n-dimensional Euclidean space with a vector norm. s This represents the error between the position of the robot's manipulator joints and the output of the virtual reference system. φ s The derivative of x s The virtual reference position signal from the robot is shown in equation (3). This indicates the virtual reference velocity signal from the robot. This indicates that the acceleration signal from the robot's virtual reference is γ2>0. v s1 ,...,v sp Let p represent a positive constant, and let p represent the number of safety constraints.

[0026] in,

[0027]

[0028] In the formula, h s Let γ1 denote the obstacle function characterizing the robot's safe set of motion, T denote the matrix transpose, and γ1>0.

[0029] The solution to CBF-QP is set to be event-triggered, denoted as... 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 arm's virtual reference system. k represents the event triggering time from solving the QP problem of the robotic arm to updating the controller. s =0,1,…∈N, where N represents the set of non-negative integers.

[0032] Using the proposed synchronization variables, the control triggered by robot events is defined as follows:

[0033]

[0034] where τ s represents the robot event-triggered controller, κ s > 0, r s represents a synchronization variable, defined by (9):

[0035]

[0036] where λ s is a constant parameter, q s is the joint position of the slave manipulator, Y s is represents the regression matrix of the slave manipulator model, satisfying:

[0037]

[0038] where θ s is the unknown parameter vector of the slave manipulator, q s is the joint position of the slave manipulator, is the joint velocity of the slave manipulator, is the position error of the slave manipulator from the virtual reference system, is the velocity error of the slave manipulator from the virtual reference system, represents the estimate of θ s , represents the time derivative of , is an arbitrary positive definite matrix.

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

[0040]

[0041] where μ s > 0, ∈ s > 0, v s > 0 is a constant parameter, represents the exponential function:

[0042]

[0043] The trigger condition is given by the following equation (16):

[0044]

[0045] Optionally, the master robot event-triggered controller in S3 is designed for the master robot, comprising:

[0046] The input of the virtual reference system (3) is selected as the following equation (17) to generate the reference signal x m , and the master robot event-triggered controller is designed as the following equation (18):

[0047] u m = e m (17)

[0048]

[0049] where u m represents the input of the master reference frame, e m represents the error between the master robot manipulator joint position and the virtual reference system output, τ m represents the master robot event-triggered controller, κ m > 0, r m represents the synchronization variable at the master robot end, i.e. represents the triggering time sequence of the controller satisfying Y m is represents the regression matrix from the manipulator model, satisfying:

[0050]

[0051] where θ m is the uncertain model parameter of the master manipulator, q m is the joint position of the master manipulator, is the joint velocity of the master manipulator, is the velocity error of the master manipulator and the master virtual reference system, represents the estimation of θ m , θ m represents the unknown parameter vector of the master robot, represents the time derivative of , Γ m is a positive definite matrix, and T represents the matrix transpose.

[0052] Optionally, the safety set of the slave robot's manipulator in S4 is as shown in the following formula (20):

[0053]

[0054] where represents the safety set, q s represents the joint position of the slave manipulator, represents a vector of multiple barrier functions, p represents the number of barrier functions, represents the p-dimensional Euclidean space. 0 p = [0, …, 0] T , and T represents the matrix transpose.

[0055] Optionally, the method further comprises:

[0056] Stability conclusions are provided for closed-loop control systems under the action of master-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 the upper bound of any delay d m ,d s satisfy:

[0058]

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

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

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

[0062] (2) If d m , Therefore, all signals are bounded, and express The L2 norm space and the L-infinite norm space.

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

[0064] Theorem 2: For the closed-loop teleoperation system, if the initial position of the slave robot is within the safe set, i.e. The operating force and the environment force satisfy f m , and for some T > 0, there exists:

[0065]

[0066] where γ2> 0, it can be guaranteed that the slave robot is safe at any time, i.e. s q

[0067] On the other hand, an event-triggered safety guarantee control device of a teleoperation robot system is provided, which is applied to an event-triggered safety guarantee control method of a teleoperation robot system, and the device comprises:

[0068] A building module is configured to build a teleoperation system with dynamic uncertainty and time delay; 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.

[0069] A constructing module is configured to construct a virtual reference system for each mechanical hand in the teleoperation system.

[0070] A designing module is configured to design a master robot event-triggered controller for the master robot and a slave robot event-triggered controller for the slave robot based on the virtual reference system, and to give an event-triggered condition for updating the master robot event-triggered controller and an event-triggered condition for updating the slave robot event-triggered controller.

[0071] An output module is configured to realize synchronization of the master robot and the slave robot according to the master robot event-triggered controller and the slave robot event-triggered controller, and to give conditions for guaranteeing stability of a closed-loop system and ensuring that a position of the slave robot is within a safe set.

[0072] On the other hand, an adaptive control device is provided, which comprises a processor and a memory having computer readable instructions stored thereon, wherein the computer readable instructions are executed by the processor to implement any one of the above event-triggered safety guarantee control methods of a teleoperation robot system.

[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 above event-triggered safety guarantee control methods of a teleoperation robot system.

[0074] The technical scheme provided by the embodiment of the present application has at least the following beneficial effects:

[0075] In the present application, the master-slave synchronization problem of a teleoperation system with safety constraints, parameter uncertainties and limited computational resources is studied. While ensuring that the slave robot is in the safe set, the entire closed-loop teleoperation system is kept stable and the master-slave synchronization is achieved. The method combines adaptive control, control barrier function and event-triggered mechanism. In order to ensure the safety synchronization of the robot, a virtual reference system is designed to provide a reference signal for the robot. At the same time, the event-triggered condition for solving the CBF-QP problem and updating the controller is provided, and the theoretical results for ensuring the stability of the closed-loop system and the safety of the slave robot are given. The simulation results provided by the present application show the effectiveness of the method. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF DRAWINGS

[0076] In order to more clearly illustrate the technical scheme in the embodiments of the present application, the drawings needed in the embodiment description will be briefly introduced as follows. Obviously, the drawings in the following description are only some embodiments of the present application, and other drawings can be obtained by those skilled in the art without creative labor.

[0077] Figure 1 is a flow chart of an event-triggered safety guarantee control method of a teleoperation robot system provided by the embodiment of the present application;

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

[0079] Figure 3 is an external force F applied by a human operator provided by the embodiment of the present application hy Figure;

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

[0081] Figure 5 is a joint speed diagram of a robot provided by the embodiment of the present application;

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

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

[0084] Figure 8 is a block diagram of an event-triggered safety guarantee control device of a teleoperation robot system provided by the embodiment of the present application;

[0085] Figure 9 Figure 1 is a structural schematic diagram of an adaptive control device provided by an embodiment of the present application. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0086] The technical solutions in the present application will be described below with reference to the drawings.

[0087] In the embodiments of the present application, the words such as "example", "for example" are used to represent an example, illustration or description. Any embodiment or design scheme described as "example" in the present application should not be interpreted as more preferred or more advantageous than other embodiments or design schemes. Rather, the word "example" is intended to present the concept in a specific manner. In addition, in the embodiments of the present application, the meaning expressed by "and / or" can be both, or can be one of the two.

[0088] In the embodiments of the present application, "image" and "picture" can be used interchangeably at times. It should be pointed out that when the distinction is not emphasized, the meanings expressed are consistent. "Of", "corresponding" and "corresponding" can be used interchangeably at times. It should be pointed out that when the distinction is not emphasized, the meanings expressed are consistent.

[0089] In the embodiments of the present application, sometimes the subscript such as W1 can be written in the form of non-subscript such as W1. When the distinction is not emphasized, the meanings expressed are consistent.

[0090] In order to make the technical problems, technical solutions and advantages of the present application clearer, specific embodiments will be described in detail below with reference to the drawings.

[0091] The embodiments of the present application provide an event-triggered safety guarantee control method of a teleoperation robot system. The method can be implemented by an adaptive control device, which can be a terminal or a server. As shown in the flowchart of the event-triggered safety guarantee control method of the teleoperation robot system, the processing flow of the method can include the following steps: Figure 1

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

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

[0094] In a feasible implementation manner, first, the control barrier function considered by the present application is introduced:

[0095] ​Consider the affine control system of the form:

[0096]

[0097] where x, f, g are locally Lipschitz continuous and u is the control. The safety of system (1) is defined by a continuously differentiable function h: X→R on the set

[0098]

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

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

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

[0102]

[0103] where i∈{1,…,m}, ψ0=h(x).

[0104] Definition 3: Define i∈{1,…,m} for system (1), a function h: X→R is called a High Order Control Barrier Function (HOCBF) of relative order m if there exists a locally Lipschitz function such that:

[0105]

[0106]

[0107] for all where 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 of the remaining orders less than or equal to m-1 along f.

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

[0109]

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

[0111]

[0112]

[0113] where, are the joint position, velocity, acceleration vectors of the master / slave robots, respectively; is the inertia matrix; is the Coriolis and centrifugal force matrix. denotes the gravity. is the Jacobian matrix. is the control torque. is the human applied force; represents the environmental force, denotes a set of n x 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: The inertia matrix M(q) is positive definite, and there exist positive scalars m i (q i ) and m i1 , m i2 such that m i1 I ≤ M i (q i ) ≤ m 2i I. I denotes the identity matrix.

[0115] Property 2:

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

[0117]

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

[0119] In teleoperation, there is usually a communication delay between the master and slave robots. Let T m ,T s denote the time delays from master to slave and from slave to master, respectively. These delays are usually asymmetric and time-varying.

[0120] Assumption 1: There exist positive constants d i , d i such that the communication delays T i ,T i satisfy 0≤T i ≤d p . Moreover, the time delays are differentiable and their derivatives are bounded.

[0121] The present invention mainly designs an event-triggered adaptive controller τ T for the teleoperation system (8)-(9) with dynamic uncertainties and time delays to achieve master-slave synchronization while ensuring that the slave manipulator states lie within their own safe sets, where the safe sets are defined as follows:

[0122]

[0123] wherein, is a vector of multiple barrier functions, 0 T = [0,..., 0] i .

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

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

[0126]

[0127] wherein, is the state of the virtual reference system, is the input of the virtual reference system to be specified later, a i , β i , κ i are all positive constants.

[0128] The idea of designing a virtual reference system is to specify a desired trajectory for each actual manipulator while synchronizing the driving virtual system. Let e i denote the error between the manipulator joint position q i and the virtual system output x i :

[0129]

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

[0131]

[0132] S3, based on the virtual reference system, respectively, design the master robot event trigger controller for the master robot and the slave robot event trigger controller for the slave robot, give the event trigger condition of the master robot event trigger controller update and the event trigger condition of the slave robot safety key quadratic programming problem solving and controller update.

[0133] Optionally, the slave robot event trigger controller for the slave robot in S3 comprises:

[0134] Since the slave needs to follow the reference signal x s , in order to ensure the safety of the slave, it is necessary to ensure that the virtual system of the slave is safe. Therefore, it is necessary to impose forward invariance on h s (x s ). To this end, the following CBF-QP filter is developed to select the reference input u s :

[0135]

[0136] Wherein,

[0137]

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

[0139] QP problem (15)-(17) is equivalent to:

[0140]

[0141] subject to Au s +b≥v s (19)

[0142] Wherein:

[0143]

[0144] It is noted that in CBF-QP (15) - (17), the safety constraints are imposed on the reference system rather than the actual system. By this approach, the exact knowledge of the reference system model is used, rather than the actual system model, to formulate the QP problem, making the QP solvable in a technical sense. In practical applications, it is not practical to solve the QP continuously. Therefore, in the present invention, it is assumed that the time instants to solve the CBF-QP are event-triggered. This not only saves computational resources, but also improves the applicability of the control framework. Moreover, the controller is updated as long as the event-triggered QP solving.

[0145] Recall that the solution of the optimal problem (15) - (17) at the triggering instant k s = 0, 1,..., N, N denotes the set of non-negative integers, Then, we have:

[0146]

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

[0148]

[0149] where κ s > 0 is the same as in (12), is an estimate of θ s , Y s is the According to the robot dynamics property 3, we have:

[0150]

[0151] To implement the controller (23), it is required to determine the triggering instants k s = 0, 1,..., N, to solve the QP and update the controller. First, define the triggering function:

[0152]

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

[0154]

[0155] Therefore, the triggering condition is:

[0156]

[0157] Optionally, the master robot event triggering controller in S3 includes:

[0158] Assuming the main robotic arm is freely moved by a human operator, meaning there are no safety constraints on it, in this scenario, to ensure the position q of the main reference frame... m Tracking the position x of the virtual reference frame m The input for selecting the primary reference frame 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 triggering time sequence. κ m >0 is the same as in equation (12), For θ m The estimated event trigger conditions are as follows:

[0163]

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

[0165]

[0166] for Represented as:

[0167]

[0168] This 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 the upper bound of any delay d m ,d s satisfy:

[0170]

[0171] Where, δ m >0,δs >0, l s >0 is an arbitrary constant, then for the closed-loop teleoperation system with the controllers (23) and (32) and with the event-triggered mechanisms (30) and (33) under Assumption 1, the following conclusions are obtained:

[0172] (1) If the considered teleoperation system is in free motion, i.e., the force f m and the environmental force f s applied by the operator are both zero, then all the signals are bounded, the closed-loop control system is asymptotically stable, and

[0173] (2) If then all the signals are bounded, and denotes the L2 norm space, the L-infinity norm space.

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

[0175] Further, the present application provides safety conclusions for the closed-loop controller under the master-slave robot controller.

[0176] The present application performs the following steps for safety analysis of the teleoperation robot system with unknown dynamics, time delay and limited computational resources:

[0177] From the above discussion, the stability is guaranteed, and now the safety conditions of the considered teleoperation robot system (8)-(9) are derived. The goal is to obtain the conditions such that (38) holds:

[0178]

[0179] It is noted that there exists a positive Lipschitz constant b s such that:

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

[0181] Further, it is specified that:

[0182]

[0183] Using the in Theorem 2, for any T>0, it has:

[0184] ​

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

[0186] Theorem 2: For the closed-loop teleoperation system with the master controller (23) and (32) and the event-triggered mechanism (30) and (33) under assumption 1, if the initial position of the slave robot is within the safety set, i.e. Meanwhile, the operation force and the environment force satisfy f m , and for some T>0, there exists:

[0187]

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

[0189] Note that the safety of the slave depends on condition (44). This condition requires that the slave is initially within the safety set and keeps a certain distance from the boundary of the safety set within a certain time.

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

[0191] Further, the application provides a simulation verification case.

[0192] The proposed control scheme is applied to a teleoperation system, and the master and slave robots are respectively a series of planar manipulator with 2 degrees of freedom, and have the following dynamics characteristics (i=m,s):

[0193]

[0194] Wherein 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 = 9.8 N / kg is set. The masses are set as m m1 = 1.5 Kg, m s1 = 2.5 Kg, m m2 = 0.75 Kg, m s2 = 1.5 Kg The joint lengths are set as l m1 = 1 s1 = 0.5 m, l m2 = 1 s2 = 0.3 m.

[0195] The safe region of the manipulator is denoted by functions i = 1,..., 4:

[0196]

[0197] Each function A constraint is introduced in (16) and (17). Specifically, these barrier functions describe the green region in Figure 2 from the robot joint space. The initial states of the master and slave are chosen as: q m (0) = [0.6, -0.4] T , q m = [0, 0] T , q s (0) = [0.2, 0.2] T , It is clear that both the master and slave are initially in the safe region.

[0198] In the simulation, the communication time delay is set as T m = 0.2 + 0.2 sin(t), T s = 0.3 + 0.3 sin(t). The control parameters are chosen as: a m = a s = 3, b m = b s = 10, k m = k s = 10, l m = l s = 1, g m = g s = 0.5. The parameters of the event trigger are chosen as m m = m s = 19, e m = e s = 10, v m = v s = 1.6. The initial states of the virtual system are set to zero, i.e.

[0199] During the simulation period from 2s to 8s, this invention assumes that a human operator applies a constant force in the y-direction to the end effector of the host machine. That is, f m =[0,1] T F hy F hy like Figure 3 As shown. Due to the operator's pushing force, the master unit will gradually move out of the safe area. Therefore, this invention investigates whether the slave unit can follow the movement of the master unit while remaining within the safe area under the proposed control scheme. Simulation results are as follows. Figures 4-6 As shown.

[0200] Figure 7 The master and slave joints are described in q s1 -q s2 The joint trajectory on the plane. Specifically, it indicates that the master unit moves outside the safe zone due to external force from a human operator, while the slave unit remains within the safe zone. Ultimately, the master and slave units synchronize near the safe zone. Figure 4 This shows the change in joint position over time, indicating that the master and slave robots attempted to synchronize before 2 seconds. Within the interval [0, 2] seconds, both robots remained within the safe zone. After 2 seconds, due to human force, the master robot moved outside the safe zone (q...). m2 >1), while attempting to follow the master's movement, but not crossing the line. After 8 seconds, the operator removed the external force. Without external force, the master robot slowly adjusted its position to synchronize with the slave robot. Finally, a consensus was reached at approximately t=15s. The speeds of the master and slave robots were as follows: Figure 5 As shown. The event triggering interval of the master-slave controller is as follows. Figure 6 As shown, this indicates that Zeno's behavior does not exist under the event-triggered mechanism.

[0201] To address the safety-critical control problem of teleoperations with unknown dynamics, time delays, and limited computational resources, this invention provides a safety filter by defining a master-slave virtual reference system. This virtual reference system simultaneously specifies the desired trajectory for both master and slave robots, ensuring master-slave synchronization. A Chain-Based Function (CBF) is defined for the slave robot's safety requirements, and the slave's safety-critical control problem is transformed into a CBF-QP problem. Furthermore, an event-triggered mechanism for solving the QP problem and determining the controller update timing is established, improving computational efficiency.

[0202] This invention investigates the master-slave synchronization problem of a teleoperation system with security constraints, parameter uncertainties, and limited computational resources. The goal is to ensure the slave robot remains within a safe set while maintaining the stability of the entire closed-loop teleoperation system and achieving master-slave synchronization. This method combines adaptive control, control barrier functions, and event-triggered mechanisms. To ensure safe synchronization of the robots, a virtual reference system is designed to provide reference signals. Furthermore, this invention provides event-triggered conditions for solving the CBF-QP problem and updating the controller, offering theoretical results to guarantee the stability of the closed-loop system and the safety of the slave robot. Simulation results demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed method.

[0203] Figure 8 This is a block diagram illustrating 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. (Refer to...) Figure 8 The device includes a creation module 310, a construction module 320, a design module 330, and an output module 340. Wherein:

[0204] Module 310 is established 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 robotic arms with n degrees of freedom.

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

[0206] Design module 330 is used to design a master robot event trigger controller and a slave robot event trigger controller based on a virtual reference system. It provides 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 for the slave robot.

[0207] The output module 340 is used to synchronize the master robot and the slave robot according to the master robot event trigger controller and the slave robot event trigger controller, and respectively provide the conditions to ensure the stability of the closed loop system and to ensure that the position of the slave robot is within the safe set.

[0208] This invention investigates the master-slave synchronization problem of a teleoperation system with security constraints, parameter uncertainties, and limited computational resources. The goal is to ensure the slave robot remains within a safe set while maintaining the stability of the entire closed-loop teleoperation system and achieving master-slave synchronization. This method combines adaptive control, control barrier functions, and event-triggered mechanisms. To ensure safe synchronization of the robots, a virtual reference system is designed to provide reference signals. Furthermore, this invention provides event-triggered conditions for solving the CBF-QP problem and updating the controller, offering theoretical results to guarantee the stability of the closed-loop system and the safety of the slave robot. Simulation results demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed method.

[0209] Figure 9 This is a schematic diagram of the structure of an adaptive control device provided in an embodiment of the present invention, as shown below. Figure 9 As shown, the adaptive control device may include the above-mentioned Figure 8 The illustrated teleoperated robot system includes an event-triggered safety control device. Optionally, the adaptive control device 410 may include a first processor 2001.

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

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

[0212] The following is combined Figure 9 A detailed description of each component of the adaptive control device 410 is provided below:

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

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

[0215] In a specific implementation, as one example, the first processor 2001 may include one or more CPUs, for example... Figure 9 CPU0 and CPU1 are shown in the diagram.

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

[0217] The memory 2002 is used to store the software program that executes the present invention, and is controlled by the first processor 2001 to execute it. The specific implementation method can be referred to the above method embodiment, and will not be repeated here.

[0218] Optionally, the memory 2002 may be a read-only memory (ROM) or other type of static storage device capable of storing static information and instructions, random access memory (RAM) or other type of dynamic storage device capable of storing information and instructions, or electrically erasable programmable read-only memory (EEPROM), compact disc read-only memory (CD-ROM) or other optical disc storage, optical disc storage (including compressed optical discs, laser discs, optical discs, digital universal optical discs, Blu-ray discs, etc.), magnetic disk storage media or other magnetic storage devices, or any other medium capable of carrying or storing desired program code in the form of instructions or data structures and accessible by a computer, but not limited thereto. The memory 2002 may be integrated with the first processor 2001 or may exist independently, and may be connected via the interface circuit of the adaptive control device 410. Figure 9 (Not shown in the figure) is coupled to the first processor 2001, and the embodiments of the present invention do not specifically limit this.

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

[0220] Alternatively, transceiver 2003 may include a receiver and a transmitter. Figure 9(Not shown separately). The receiver is used to implement the receiving function, and the transmitter is used to implement the sending function.

[0221] Optionally, the transceiver 2003 can be integrated with the first processor 2001, or it can exist independently and be connected via the interface circuit of the adaptive control device 410. Figure 9 (Not shown in the figure) is coupled to the first processor 2001, and the embodiments of the present invention do not specifically limit this.

[0222] It should be noted that, ​ The structure of the adaptive control device 410 shown does not constitute a limitation on the router. Actual knowledge structure identification devices may include more or fewer components than shown, or combine certain components, or have different component arrangements.

[0223] Furthermore, the technical effects of the adaptive control device 410 can be referenced from the technical effects of the event-triggered safety assurance control method for the teleoperated robot system described in the above method embodiments, and will not be repeated here.

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

[0225] It should also be understood that the memory in the embodiments of the present invention can be volatile memory or non-volatile memory, or may include both volatile and non-volatile memory. The non-volatile memory can be read-only memory (ROM), programmable read-only memory (PROM), erasable programmable read-only memory (EPROM), electrically erasable programmable read-only memory (EEPROM), or flash memory. The volatile memory can be random access memory (RAM), which is used as an external cache. By way of example, but not limitation, many forms of random access memory (RAM) are available, such as static RAM (SRAM), dynamic RAM (DRAM), synchronous DRAM (SDRAM), double data rate synchronous DRAM (DDR SDRAM), enhanced synchronous DRAM (ESDRAM), synchronous linked DRAM (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 thereof. When implemented using software, the above embodiments can be implemented, in whole or in part, as 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, all or part of the processes or functions described in the embodiments of the present invention are generated. 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. For example, the computer instructions can be transmitted from one website, computer, server, or data center to another website, computer, server, or data center via wired (e.g., infrared, wireless, microwave, etc.) means. The computer-readable storage medium can be any available medium that a computer can access or a data storage device such as a server or data center that includes one or more sets of available media. The available medium can be a magnetic medium (e.g., floppy disk, hard disk, magnetic tape), an optical medium (e.g., DVD), or a semiconductor medium. A semiconductor medium can be a solid-state drive.

[0227] It should be understood that the term "and / or" in this article is merely a description of the relationship between related objects, indicating that three relationships can exist. For example, A and / or B can represent: A existing alone, A and B existing simultaneously, or B existing alone. A and B can be singular or plural. Additionally, the character " / " in this article generally indicates an "or" relationship between the preceding and following related objects, but it can also represent an "and / or" relationship. Please refer to the context for a more accurate understanding.

[0228] In this 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 refer to any combination of these items, including any combination of a single item or a plurality of items. For example, at least one of a, b, or c can represent: a, b, c, ab, ac, bc, or abc, where a, b, and c can be a single item or multiple items.

[0229] It should be understood that, in various embodiments of the present invention, the order of the above-mentioned process numbers does not imply 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 recognize that the units and algorithm steps of the various examples 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 implemented in hardware or software depends on the specific application and design constraints of the technical solution. Those skilled in the art can use different methods to implement the described functions for each specific application, but such implementations should not be considered beyond the scope of this invention.

[0231] Those skilled in the art will clearly understand that, for the sake of convenience and brevity, the specific working processes of the devices, apparatuses, and units described above can be referred to the corresponding processes in the foregoing method embodiments, and will not be repeated here.

[0232] In the several embodiments provided by this invention, it should be understood that the disclosed devices, apparatuses, and methods can be implemented in other ways. For example, the apparatus embodiments described above are merely illustrative; for instance, the division of units is only a logical functional division, and in actual implementation, there may be other division methods. For example, multiple units or components may be combined or integrated into another device, or some features may be ignored or not executed. Furthermore, the coupling or direct coupling or communication connection shown or discussed may be through some interfaces; the indirect coupling or communication connection between devices or units may be electrical, mechanical, or other forms.

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

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

[0235] If the aforementioned functions are implemented as 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, or the part that contributes to the prior art, or a part of the technical solution, can be embodied in the form of a software product. This computer software product is stored in a storage medium and includes several instructions to cause a computer device (which may be a personal computer, server, or network device, etc.) to execute all or part of the steps of the methods described in the various embodiments of the present invention. The aforementioned storage medium includes various media capable of storing program code, such as USB flash drives, portable hard drives, read-only memory (ROM), random access memory (RAM), magnetic disks, or optical disks.

[0236] The above description is merely a specific embodiment of the present invention, but the scope of protection of the present invention is not limited thereto. Any variations or substitutions that can be easily conceived by those skilled in the art within the technical scope disclosed in the present invention should be included within the scope of protection of the present invention. Therefore, the scope of protection of the present invention should be determined by the scope of the claims.

Claims

1. An event-triggered safety assurance control method for a teleoperated robot system, characterized in that, The method includes: 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; S2. Construct a virtual reference system for each manipulator in the teleoperation system; 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, and provide 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 for the slave robot. S4. Based on the master robot event trigger controller and the slave robot event trigger controller, realize the synchronization of the master robot and the slave robot, and respectively provide the conditions to ensure the stability of the closed-loop system and to ensure that the position of the slave robot is within the safe set; The teleoperation system in S1 is shown in equations (1) and (2) below: In the formula, M m / M s Let q represent the inertia matrix of the master / slave robot. m / q s Indicates the joint positions of the master / slave robot. This represents the acceleration vector of the master / slave robot. Represents the Coriolis force matrix and centrifugal force matrix of the master / slave robot. G represents the speed of the master / slave robot. m / G s Indicates the gravity of the master / slave robot. Let f represent the Jacobian matrix of the master / slave robot. m τ represents the force exerted by a person. m / τ s f represents the control torque of the master / slave robot. s The environmental forces are represented by m, the master robot, and s, which represent the slave robot. S2 involves constructing a virtual reference system for each robotic arm in the teleoperation system, including: A virtual reference system is constructed for each robot arm, as shown in equation (3): In the formula, Let α represent the acceleration of virtual reference system i, where i = m, s, j = m, s, j ≠ i, m represents the master robot, s represents the slave robot, and α represents the acceleration of virtual reference system i. i ,β i ,k i Represents positive numbers. This represents the position signal of the virtual reference system i. Indicates the speed of virtual reference system i. Let x represent an n-dimensional Euclidean space with vector norm. j Let T represent the position signal of the virtual reference system j, and t represent time. j u represents the time delay from signal transmission from robot j to robot i. i Indicates the input of the specified virtual reference system; The S3 step of designing a slave robot event trigger controller for the slave robot includes: A CBF-QP filter based on a quadratic programming problem with a control obstacle function is developed to select from the robot's reference input u. s The CBF-QP filter is shown in equations (4) and (5) below: In the formula, Let e ​​represent an n-dimensional Euclidean space with a vector norm. s This represents the error between the position of the robot's manipulator joints and the output of the virtual reference system. φ s The derivative of x s The virtual reference position signal from the robot is shown in equation (3). This indicates the virtual reference velocity signal from the robot. This indicates that the acceleration signal from the robot's virtual reference is γ2>

0. v s1 ,...,v sp Let p represent a positive constant, and p represent the number of safety constraints. in, In the formula, h s Let γ1 denote the obstacle function characterizing the robot's motion safety set, T denote the matrix transpose, and γ1>0; The solution to CBF-QP is set to be event-triggered, denoted as... For CBF-QP filters (4)-(5) at the trigger time The solution is: In the formula, u s (t) represents the input from the robot arm's virtual reference system. k represents the event triggering time from solving the CBF-QP problem of the robotic arm and updating the controller. s =0,1,…∈N, where N represents the set of non-negative integers. Using the proposed synchronization variables, the control triggered by robot events is defined as follows: In the formula, τ s Indicates that the controller is triggered by a robot event, κ s >0, r s The synchronous variable is defined by equation (9): In the formula, λ s For positive constant parameters, q s To determine the joint position of the robotic arm, Y s for The regression matrix from the robotic arm model satisfies: In the formula, θ s Let q be the unknown parameter vector from the robot arm. s To determine the position of the robotic arm's joints, To obtain the joint speed of the robotic arm, To account for the positional error between the robotic arm and the virtual reference system, To account for the speed error between the robotic arm and the virtual reference system, Represents θ s The estimate, express Time derivative, Let λ be any positive definite matrix. s For positive constant parameters; The trigger functions are shown in equations (11) and (12) below: In the formula, μ s >0, ∈ s >0, v s >0 represents a constant parameter. Representing the exponential function: The triggering condition is shown in equation (16) below: The S3 section describes designing a main robot event trigger controller for the main robot, including: The input to the virtual reference system (3) is chosen as equation (17), and the reference signal x is generated. m The main robot event trigger controller is designed as follows (18): the m =and m (17) In the formula, u m e represents the input of the main robot's virtual reference system. m This represents the error between the joint positions of the main robot's manipulator and the output of the virtual reference system, i.e., e. m =q m -x m , τ m Indicates the main robot event trigger controller, κ m >0, r m This represents the synchronization variable on the main robot side, i.e. Indicates that the controller satisfies The triggering time series, Y m for The regression matrix from the robotic arm model satisfies: In the formula, θ m Uncertain model parameters of the main manipulator, q m The joint positions of the main robotic arm. The joint speed of the main robotic arm, The speed error between the main manipulator and the main virtual reference system Represents θ m The estimate, θ m This represents the vector of unknown parameters of the main robot. Represented as Time derivative, Γ m Let λ be a positive definite matrix, T denote the matrix transpose, and λ be a positive definite matrix. m For positive constant parameters.

2. 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's robotic arm in S4 is shown in equation (20) below: In the formula, Let q represent the safe set. s This indicates the position of the robotic arm's joints. Let p represent a vector of multiple obstacle functions, where p represents the number of obstacle functions. Describes p-dimensional Euclidean space, 0 p =[0,…,0] T , where T represents the matrix transpose.

3. The event-triggered safety assurance control method for a teleoperated robot system according to claim 1, characterized in that, The method further includes: Stability conclusions are provided for closed-loop control systems under the action of master-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 the upper bound of any delay d m ,d s satisfy: Where, δ m >0,δ s >0,l s >0 is an arbitrary constant, μ m >0, μ s If 0 is the event trigger parameter, then for a closed-loop teleoperation system, the following conclusions can be drawn: (1) If the teleoperation system under consideration is in a state of free motion, i.e., the force f applied by the operator m and environmental forces f s If all signals are zero, then all signals are bounded, the closed-loop control system is asymptotically stable, and Where t represents time. This represents the position signal of the virtual reference system i, where i = m, s. Describe an n-dimensional Euclidean space with a vector norm. q represents the velocity of the virtual reference system i. m / q s Indicates the joint position of the master / slave robot, e s e represents the error between the position of the robot's manipulator joints and the output from the virtual reference system. m This represents the error between the joint positions of the main robot's manipulator and the output of the main virtual reference system. Indicates the speed of the master / slave robot; (2) If Therefore, all signals are bounded, and express The L2 norm space and the L-infinite norm space; (3) The Zeno phenomenon does not exist in the proposed control scheme; Theorem 2: For a closed-loop teleoperation system, if the robot's initial position is within the safe set, i.e. Simultaneously, operational force and environmental force are satisfied. And for a certain T>0, we have: Where γ2>0, then it can be guaranteed that the robot is safe at any time, i.e., q s ∈S for all t>0.

4. An event-triggered safety assurance control device for a teleoperated robot system, wherein the event-triggered safety assurance control device for the teleoperated robot system is used to implement the event-triggered safety assurance control method for the teleoperated robot system as described in any one of claims 1-3, characterized in that, The device includes: A module is established 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 robotic arms with n degrees of freedom; Construction module for constructing a virtual reference system for each manipulator in the teleoperation system; The design module is used to design a master robot event triggering controller for the master robot and a slave robot event triggering controller for the slave robot based on the virtual reference system, and to provide the event triggering conditions for updating the master robot event triggering controller and the event triggering conditions for solving the safety-critical quadratic programming problem and updating the controller for the slave robot. The output module is used to synchronize the master robot and the slave robot according to the master robot event trigger controller and the slave robot event trigger controller, and respectively provide the conditions to ensure the stability of the closed loop system and to ensure that the position of the slave robot is within the safe set.

5. An adaptive control device, characterized in that, The adaptive control device includes: processor; A memory storing computer-readable instructions that, when executed by the processor, implement the method as described in any one of claims 1 to 3.

6. A computer-readable storage medium, characterized in that, The computer-readable storage medium contains program code that can be invoked by a processor to execute the method as described in any one of claims 1 to 3.

Images