Unified Impedance and Admittance Control

By Christian Ott, R. Mukherjee, Yoshihiko Nakamura. IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, 2010

347 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Control and Systems Engineering, Mechanical Engineering

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/706e7f3f97a8d30a55012f9ef92a063c2b86204f

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Mechanical Engineering

1. H. V. D. Kooij
2. Arno H. A. Stienen
3. Arvid Q. L. Keemink

Citations in the corpus

• Variable Impedance Control of Redundant Manipulators for Intuitive Human–Robot Physical Interaction (2015, neutral): “, [25]).”
• Admittance control for physical human–robot interaction (2018, background): “Owing to this dual nature of admittance control and impedance control, they naturally excel at both different ends of the “haptic spectrum” (Adams and Hannaford, 1999; Faulring et al., 2007; Ott et al., 2010; Yokokohji et al., 1996).”
• A survey on robotic devices for upper limb rehabilitation (2014, background): “The advantages and disadvantages of the impedance and admittance control systems are complementary [196].”
• A Review of Algorithms for Compliant Control of Stiff and Fixed-Compliance Robots (2016, background): “The two main implementations of interaction control are impedance and admittance control [44] both aiming at shaping the dynamical relation between actuator velocity (or position) Fig.”