Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Abstract Workspace characterization, trajectory selection, actuator sizing, and closed-loop control are inter-dependent but are frequently assessed separately. This paper develops an integrated simulation-based task-to-actuator design framework for a six-degree-of-freedom manipulator carrying an 18-kg payload. A study of 50,000robot configurations identifies overlapping but independently classified high-quality (5,001) and screened-Pareto(1,094) workspace subsets. Independently generated inverse-kinematics seeds produce 24 candidate trajectories,of which 11 satisfy joint-space continuity requirements and eight meet dense full-pose tolerances. Dynamic Paretoevaluation of the eight feasible trajectories retains two nondominated representatives, C3 and C24. They reflectdifferent peak-torque, RMS-torque, and mechanical-work demands. These alternatives inform a manufacturer-constrained motor–gearbox search and multi-rate PMSM–FOC–CTC simulation. Four six-second letter-E sce-narios provide two controlled comparisons. Under common H1 actuator architecture and G2 controller gains,reference corner rounding reduces Cartesian tracking RMSE from 44.5767 to 3.4071 mm. Under common A218architecture and G2 controller gains, the C24-based scenario achieves an RMSE of 1.7411 mm compared with1.9781 mm for the C3-based scenario. The results distinguish local workspace quality from complete-trajectoryfeasibility. They demonstrate the importance of retaining alternative trajectories through actuator selection andclosed-loop validation. Cross-architecture comparisons remain descriptive rather than isolated trajectory-effecttests. Future work will address repeated-duty thermal assessment and experimental validation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Adukwu et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: