用于精密无损检测（NDE）测量的移动机器人平台的精度与可重复性对比研究
A comparative study on the accuracy & repeatability of mobile robotic platforms for the delivery of precision NDE measurement
中文总结 AI 辅助
本研究基于激光跟踪仪评估5款商用移动机器人平台的NDE测量精度，发现其均无法满足航空航天NDE的基座公差，为各平台所需补充传感规模提供了可复现的选择依据。
中文摘要 AI 辅助
移动机器人平台为大型航空航天结构的无损检测（NDE）提供了固定机械臂的灵活替代方案，但其基座定位精度及该精度如何指导部署尚未在统一的外部参考协议下进行评估。本研究提出了一种基于激光跟踪仪的评估工作流程（真值约为6微米），在统一协议下测量了5款商用移动平台（KUKA KMP-1500、KUKA KMR、MiR250、Boston Dynamics Spot、Clearpath Husky）的静态及分段轨迹定位精度。采用耦合多角校准方法恢复激光与机器人的变换关系及反射镜偏移，使用所有位姿的普通最小二乘法，仅保留鲁棒估计作为过失检查。静态定位精度的中位数范围为8.2毫米（KMP-1500）至63.5毫米（Spot），仅使用轮式里程计的Husky无法校准。动态路径跟踪通过横向轨迹误差表征，该分量对时间对齐不敏感，误差范围为6.9毫米（KMP-1500）至112.1毫米（Spot）。精度与可校准性均与定位能力相关，从最新的激光雷达SLAM平台到无地图视觉里程计依次变化。没有任何配置仅靠基座就能满足航空航天NDE 0.2至1.0毫米的公差要求；研究结果可作为设计输入，确定各平台所需的补充传感规模：最佳平台约需1个数量级，最差平台近2个数量级，为平台选择提供了可复现的依据，而非可行性声明。
英文摘要
Mobile robotic platforms offer a flexible alternative to fixed manipulators for non-destructive evaluation (NDE) of large aerospace structures, but their base-positioning accuracy and how that accuracy should inform deployment have not been assessed under a common, externally referenced protocol. This work presents a laser tracker-based evaluation workflow (ground truth approximately 6 micrometers) that measures the static and segmented trajectory positioning accuracy of five commercial mobile platforms (KUKA KMP-1500, KUKA KMR, MiR250, Boston Dynamics Spot, Clearpath Husky) under a common protocol. A coupled multi-corner calibration recovers the laser-to-robot transformation and reflector offsets; ordinary least squares over all poses is used, with robust estimation retained only as a blunder check. Static positioning accuracy ranged from a median of 8.2 mm (KMP-1500) to 63.5 mm (Spot), with the wheel-odometry-only Husky uncalibratable. Dynamic path following was characterised by cross-track error; the component was insensitive to temporal alignment, which ranged from 6.9 mm (KMP-1500) to 112.1 mm (Spot). Both accuracy and calibratability tracked localisation capability, from the newest LiDAR SLAM platform to map-free visual odometry. No configuration meets the 0.2 to 1.0 mm aerospace NDE tolerance from the base alone; the results are framed as a design input that sizes the supplementary sensing each platform requires: roughly one order of magnitude for the best platform and nearly two for the worst, providing a reproducible basis for platform selection rather than a feasibility claim.
