manipula-tor control. For stiff environments the correspondence is exact. However, even for softer environments, a similar response of the system is indicated. Next, the results of an implementation of these control schemes on the CMU DD Arm II are pre-sented, confirming the predictions of the analysis

of the control algorithms on the CMU DD Arm II system. The results confirm that manipulator impact against a stiff environment without bouncing can be readily handled by this novel control strategy. 1 Introduction There are two extreme modes of operation for a manipulator: position controlled motion through

of the controllers are experimentally tested on the CMU DD Arm II , confirming the theoretical predictions. Among the important results presented is the conclusive demonstration for the first time that integral gain control is the best basic strategy for force control of manipulators. 1 Introduction Many automation

the approximations used, two measures are taken. First, a simulation of the fourth order model is performed, and compared against experimental data obtained from the CMU DD Arm II system. Second, a stability analysis of several force control schemes acting on the modelled plant is reviewed and compared against

manipulator control. For stiff environments the correspondence is exact. However, even for softer environments similar response of the system is indicated. Next, the results of an implementation of these control schemes on the CMU DD Arm II are presented, confirming the predictions of the analysis

of the manipulator dynamics. The two manipulator control schemes have been implemented on the CMU DD Arm II with a sampling period of 2 ms. We discuss the design of controller gains for both the computedtorque and the independent joint control schemes and establish a framework for comparing their trajectory tracking

inertia matrix in the torque compu-tation. This observation is further supported by our analysis of the dynamics equations. The manipulator control schemes have been implemented on the CMU DD arm II with a sam-pling period of 2 ms. 1.

implementation, we use a Hybrid controller that uses both position and force set points. The edge tracker, pre-sented in this article, has been implemented on the CMU DD Arm II system. While the signal processing and the control computation require 30 ms, the tactile images are transferred from the sensor

yze e mun rui fm dig incgora a mificatiO. We illt r ia N-E dirt dd m). T N rcent. We e f rM.W Manipulator 1.

, and a configuration file library. Chimera II is currently being used with a variety of systems, including the CMU Direct Drive Arm II, the CMU Reconfigurable Modular Manipulator System, the Troikabot System for Rapid Assembly, and the Self-Mobile Space Manipulator. I.