M. Moll and M. A. Erdmann. Manipulation of pose distributions. In B. R. Donald, K. M. Lynch, and D. Rus, editors, Algorithmic 2001. Home/Search Document Details and Download
Summary Related Articles Check |
This paper is cited in the following contexts:
Stable Limit Sets in a Dynamic Parts Feeder - Lynch, Northrop, Pan (2002) (Correct)
.... parts feeder design is to design an environment that reduces the uncertainty in the state of a part (or set of parts) The feeder may rely solely on the geometry of specially designed fixtures interacting with a part on a conveyor belt or in a gravity field [8] 10] 29] 31] 20] 3] 5] [25], 32] 33] or specially designed motions of generic surfaces [11] 26] 12] 34] 7] 1] 6] 19] or some combination of geometry, materials, and motion (open loop or sensor based) design. In all cases, the goal is to collapse the possible initial states of the part into a smaller set ....
M. Moll and M. A. Erdmann. Manipulation of pose distributions. In B. R. Donald, K. M. Lynch, and D. Rus, editors, Algorithmic 2001.
Stable Limit Sets in a Dynamic Parts Feeder - Lynch, Northrop, Pan (2002) (Correct)
....of parts feeders. As a result, design of most industrial vibratory parts feeders is based on trial and error. In an effort to speed up the design process, design approaches have been proposed based on statistics on the part state collected through extensive dynamic simulation [2] 13] 23] [24]. These statistics form a high level description of the behavior of the dynamical system, which can be modified bychanging the design parameters. In this paper we study an intermediate level description based on recognizing design parameter dependent features of the dynamical system and tuning ....
M. Moll and M. A. Erdmann. Manipulation of pose distributions. In B. R. Donald, K. M. Lynch, and D. Rus, editors, Algorithmic Natick, MA, 2000.
Uncertainty Reduction Using Dynamics - Moll, Erdmann (2000) Self-citation (Moll Erdmann) (Correct)
....idea: Figure 1: A part is dropped on a surface. A part is released from a certain height and relative horizontal position with respect to the bowl. The only forces acting on the part are gravity and friction. We assume the bowl doesn t move. We can compute the nal rest 1 For more details see Moll and Erdmann (2000). ing conguration for all possible initial orientations. This will give us the pdf of stable poses. The goal is to nd the drop height, relative position and bowl shape that will maximally reduce uncertainty. In section 3 we will present some results for this example. In section 4 we will ....
....cosf) 2g( d n cosf Re) # 2gR # 1 cos( a 2 f) # , where x is the direction that will result in the largest increase of kinetic energy, d n = R(cos a 2 sin(q f) and e = cos( a 2 f) cos(a 2) cosf max # tanf, 2sin a 2 sinf # . Proof outline. For details see (Moll and Erdmann, 2000)) After one bounce the orientation is assumed to be in the ideal orientation, as this will result in the largest increase in kinetic energy. The translation of the center of mass in the direction normal to the surface is equal to d n . This can be seen by noting that d n is simply the difference ....
[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]
Moll, M. and Erdmann, M. A. (2000). Manipulation of pose distributions. Technical Report CMU-CS-00-111, Dept. of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University.
Manipulation of Pose Distributions - Moll, Erdmann (2000) (2 citations) Self-citation (Moll Erdmann) (Correct)
....coe#cient of tangential restitution. With this extra parameter a large part of allowable collision impulses can be accounted for, and at the same time this collision rule restricts the predicted collision impulse to the allowable part of impulse space. This is the collision rule we will use (see [36] for details) Instead of having algebraic laws, one could also try to model object interactions during impact. This approach is taken, for instance, by Bhatt and Koechling [7, 8] who modeled impacts as a flow problem. While this might lead to more accurate predictions, it is obviously ....
....energy plus the maximal increase in kinetic energy is less than some bound, the rod is quasicaptured. This bound depends on the current orientation, the current velocity, the slope of the surface and the geometry of the rod. Because of the way we have set up our generalized coordinates (see [36] for details) the kinetic energy is 1 2 m#v# 2 . In other words, the mass is just a constant scalar. Without loss of generality we can assume m = 2. That way the kinetic energy is simply #v# 2 . We will write v for #v#. Theorem 4 The rod with a velocity vector of length v and in contact ....
Mark Moll and Michael A. Erdmann. Manipulation of pose distributions. Technical Report CMU-CS-00-111, Dept. of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University, 2000. http://www.cs.cmu.edu/mmoll/publications.
Online articles have much greater impact More about CiteSeer.IST Add search form to your site Submit documents Feedback
CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC