All industrial POCs
POC 02Reproducible now

Multi-Regime Manipulator Dynamics

Free-space slew, contact approach, and loaded manipulation — three stiffness regimes, one solver configuration, zero re-tuning.

0
SolvSRK divergences at contact transition
3/5
RK45 divergences at contact transition
<1 µm
Near-equilibrium residual vs LSODA
10⁶
Eigenvalue ratio at contact (7-DOF)

The scenario

Set the picture

A 6-DOF industrial manipulator arm picks components from a conveyor (free-space slew, low stiffness), approaches a fixture (contact approach, rising stiffness as compliance controllers engage), inserts and fastens a part (loaded manipulation, high stiffness from Hertzian contact forces). The dynamics cross three stiffness regimes in a single pick-and-place cycle.

The same multi-regime challenge appears in welding robots (arc ignition → seam tracking → crater fill), CNC tool changers, collaborative robots handling variable payloads, and surgical manipulators transitioning between free motion and tissue contact.

Cost today

Standard ODE solvers (RK45, Dormand-Prince) are tuned for one stiffness regime. When the manipulator transitions from free-space to contact, the eigenvalue ratio jumps by 3–4 orders of magnitude. The solver either takes thousands of tiny steps (simulation runs 50–100× slower than real time) or diverges entirely.

Industrial practice: switch between separate solver profiles at regime boundaries, detected by hand-coded heuristics. Each profile needs separate tuning. Each transition needs a guard condition. The guard conditions are where the crashes hide.

What changes with SolvSRK

SolvSRK handles stiffness transitions internally — no external guard conditions, no profile switching, no per-regime tuning.

On SCARA 4-DOF and 7-DOF manipulator benchmarks with Hertzian contact forces, SolvSRK maintained impedance parity with LSODA (the gold-standard stiff solver) across the full workspace — including the contact transition where RK45 diverges.

Near-equilibrium precision: sub-micron positional agreement with LSODA at the insertion dwell point, where the manipulator holds position under contact load.

Measurable outcome

What we claim — and how it survives review

Each line below maps to a captured number in the demo section. Every number is reproducible from the benchmark suite.

  • Impedance parity with LSODA across free-space, contact approach, and loaded manipulation regimes.
  • Zero divergences at stiffness transitions (RK45: diverges at contact onset in 3 of 5 benchmark trajectories).
  • Single solver configuration — no per-regime tuning profiles, no guard-condition heuristics.
  • Sub-micron near-equilibrium precision at the insertion dwell point.
  • Validated on SCARA 4-DOF and 7-DOF manipulator models with Hertzian contact.

The demo

What was tested. How. What the simulation printed.

SCARA 4-DOF pick-and-place cycle: free-space slew (0.8 s), contact approach with compliance (0.3 s), loaded insertion with Hertzian contact (0.4 s), retract (0.5 s). 7-DOF variant with higher stiffness ratio (10⁶). Both benchmarks run against LSODA (reference), RK45 (standard), and SolvSRK.

Measured: max position error vs LSODA, divergence count, wall-clock time, near-equilibrium residual at the insertion dwell point.

Captured benchmark output

The numbers the simulation actually printed.

Manipulator dynamics: SolvSRK vs baselines across regime transitions
Solver4-DOF max err7-DOF max errDivergencesNear-eq residual
LSODA (reference)0 / 5
SolvSRK0.8 µm1.2 µm0 / 50.4 µm
RK4512.3 µm*diverged3 / 5n/a

* RK45 4-DOF error on the 2 trajectories where it did not diverge. 7-DOF: diverged on all contact-transition trajectories.

Evidence pointers

Where the claims live in the evidence register

These are the validation sources a reviewer should trace to verify every number on this page.

  • Robotics vertical — multi-regime dynamics validation complete
  • 7-DOF manipulator dynamics benchmark suite
  • SolvSRK dynamics validation — SCARA 4-DOF benchmark
  • SolvSRK stability under stiffness — eigenvalue ratio 10⁶

Want to see these numbers on your plant?

Run the benchmark on your actual process model.

Two weeks, fully credited. No production integration needed. Every claim above traces back to a simulation you can verify.

Talk to us