I think can be more simple than admittance control ... but after andypugh
condideration ... think admittance control was the best way to do.
On Mon, 22 May 2023 at 11:26, Les Newell wrote:
>
> I think the OP is referring to a function on some robot arms where the
> drives apply enough torque to counterbalance the weight of the arm while
> not trying to hold position. This allows you to grab hold of it and
> manually move it around. I
I think the OP is referring to a function on some robot arms where the
drives apply enough torque to counterbalance the weight of the arm while
not trying to hold position. This allows you to grab hold of it and
manually move it around. I think this would require some interesting
kinematics to
On Sun, 21 May 2023 at 21:53, theman whosoldtheworld
wrote:
>
> a curiosity: when the cobots press the freedrive button, they use
> torque sensors such as ? on an admittance based control or just add
> and subtract torque to the loop in torque control?
I think that we need more context to even
a curiosity: when the cobots press the freedrive button, they use
torque sensors such as ? on an admittance based control or just add
and subtract torque to the loop in torque control?
I would implement these function on my robot.
___
Emc-users
