Closed-Kinematic Manipulator Path Planning for Collision Avoidance

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing movement planning algorithms for robots with closed kinematics struggle to generate deterministic, collision-free trajectories efficiently, especially when dealing with complex environments and dynamic changes.

Innovation Solution

Formulating the collision-free movement planning as a dynamic optimization problem that accounts for the dynamics of the manipulator, weighted via a cost functional, and solved numerically with inequality and equality restrictions to ensure closed kinematics and avoid collisions.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Adaptability or versatility

If probabilistic methods (PRM or RRT) are used for motion planning with closed kinematics, then the method can handle complex environments, but the probability that a random configuration satisfies the closed kinematics constraint approaches zero, leading to high computational times

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveability to handle complex environmentsVSAvoidcomputational time
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent replaces probabilistic sampling methods with a deterministic optimization-based approach. Instead of randomly sampling configurations and hoping to satisfy closed kinematics constraints, the system formulates motion planning as a boundary value problem with differential algebraic equations that directly enforce closed kinematics constraints, eliminating the randomness and associated computational inefficiency.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent changes the fundamental parameters of the motion planning approach by switching from probabilistic sampling to deterministic numerical integration and optimization. The system uses differential algebraic equations and numerical solvers to directly compute trajectories that satisfy closed kinematics, transforming the problem from one of random search to one of controlled numerical computation.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

2Loss of time

If probabilistic methods are used for motion planning, then computational time can be limited, but the trajectories generated are non-deterministic and unpredictable

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecomputational timeVSAvoiddeterminism of trajectories
Core Design Contradiction:
Loss of timeVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent substitutes probabilistic algorithms with deterministic numerical methods. The motion planning is formulated as a boundary value problem solved through numerical integration of differential algebraic equations, which inherently produces deterministic results. The use of numerical solvers with fixed initial conditions and constraint equations ensures that the same input always yields the same trajectory.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent segments the motion planning problem into distinct mathematical components: differential algebraic equations for dynamics, boundary conditions for start and end states, and algebraic constraints for closed kinematics. This segmentation allows each component to be solved deterministically using appropriate numerical methods, ensuring reproducible results.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

3Reliability

If optimization-based methods are used for motion planning with closed kinematics, then deterministic trajectories can be generated in finite computing time, but the formulation of a suitable optimization problem that comprehensively encompasses motion planning is required

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedeterminism of trajectoriesVSAvoidcomplexity of optimization problem formulation
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent creates a universal optimization framework that handles multiple aspects of motion planning simultaneously. The differential algebraic equation approach naturally incorporates dynamics, closed kinematics constraints, and boundary conditions in a unified mathematical formulation, eliminating the need for separate optimization problems for each constraint type.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent introduces numerical integration and algebraic constraint solving as intermediary steps between the optimization objective and the final trajectory. These intermediaries translate the complex multi-constraint problem into a sequence of manageable numerical computations, making the overall formulation more tractable while maintaining comprehensiveness.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

4Reliability

If traditional motion planning methods are used for closed kinematics, then the closed kinematics constraint must be satisfied at all times, but this represents an additional restriction on freedom of movement that makes finding collision-free paths difficult

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesatisfaction of closed kinematicsVSAvoidrestriction on freedom of movement
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies dynamics principles by formulating motion planning as a differential algebraic equation problem that inherently respects the dynamic constraints of closed kinematic chains. The numerical integration approach naturally maintains the dynamic relationships between connected bodies, allowing freedom of movement within the constraints of the closed chain rather than treating constraints as static restrictions.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The patent transitions from viewing closed kinematics constraints as restrictions in configuration space to treating them as natural consequences of the system's dynamic model. By formulating the problem in terms of differential algebraic equations that capture the essence of closed kinematic chains, the constraints become integral to the motion description rather than external limitations.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #17Another dimension (Dimensionality change)

Data Source

PatentEP3723945B1Collision-free movement planning in a closed kinematic system
Publication Date: 2025.04.02 PILZ GMBH & CO KG
  • EP3723945B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP3723945B1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP3723945B1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

A method (100) for collision-free movement planning for a first manipulator (28) in a closed kinematic system, having the steps of: defining a dynamic optimisation problem (12), solving the optimisation problem (12) using a numerical approach and determining a first path of movement for the first manipulator (28) on the basis of the solution to the optimisation problem (12). The dynamic optimisation problem (12) comprises a cost functional (20), which weights states (16) and manipulated variables (18) of the first manipulator (28), a dynamic system (14), which defines states (16) and manipulated variables (18) of the first manipulator (28) on the basis of time, and at least one inequation restriction (24) for a distance from collisions. Further, the optimisation problem (12) comprises at least one equation restriction (22) for the closed kinematic system.