Multi-Processor Robot Control for High-Frequency Feedback Stability
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
General-purpose controllers for robots face challenges in achieving robust stability and maintainability due to fixed input intervals for feedback information from external recognition devices, limiting real-time control and flexibility in reflecting high-frequency feedback, and difficulties in software modification for compatibility reasons.
Innovation Solution
A control device with at least two processors, including a first processor for upper-level software that derives feature amounts from recognition results and a second processor for lower-level software that outputs command values, along with middle-level software for generating motion plans, allowing flexible processing and integration of feedback for improved stability and maintainability.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Device complexity
If feedback information is accepted at a fixed time period, then system simplicity is maintained, but real-time control capability deteriorates
Solution Approach 1:
The control device is divided into multiple independent processing units: an upper-level processing unit that derives feature amounts from recognition results, a middle-level processing unit that generates motion plans, and a lower-level processing unit that outputs command values. This segmentation allows each unit to operate at optimal speeds, with the lower-level unit capable of high-frequency feedback processing without being constrained by fixed time periods, thus improving real-time control capability while maintaining overall system simplicity.
2Adaptability or versatility
If software is modified to improve functionality, then adaptability is enhanced, but compatibility and system stability deteriorate
Solution Approach 1:
The software is segmented into three independent levels: upper-level software for feature amount derivation, middle-level software for motion plan generation, and lower-level software for command value output. Each level can be modified and updated independently without affecting the others, enhancing adaptability while maintaining system stability. The standardized interfaces between levels ensure compatibility is preserved even as individual components evolve.
3Reliability
If high-frequency feedback information is processed, then control stability is improved, but processing complexity increases
Solution Approach 1:
Processing complexity is distributed across three specialized units: the upper-level unit handles feature extraction, the middle-level unit manages motion planning, and the lower-level unit processes high-frequency feedback for command generation. This segmentation allows high-frequency feedback to be processed effectively for improved control stability without concentrating all processing complexity in a single unit, making the overall system more manageable.
Data Source
AI summary
A control device includes at least two processors comprising at least a first processor and a second processor. The control device controls at least one autonomous motion mechanism on the basis of a recognition result received from a recognition device. A storage device of the control device stores upper-level software, middle-level software, and lower-level software. The upper-level software derives a feature amount representing a feature of the recognition result. The middle-level software generates a motion plan of the autonomous motion mechanism on the basis of the feature amount. The lower-level software outputs a command value for controlling the autonomous motion mechanism on the basis of the motion plan. The first processor executes at least the upper-level software, the second processor executes at least the lower-level software, and at least one processor included in the control device executes the middle-level software.