CRC Press - Robotics and Automation Handbook Episode 1 Part 4 ppt

Kane’s response to the need to clarify the process of formulating equations of motion using the Principle of Virtual Work was one ofthe key factors that led to the development of his own

The origins of Kane’s method can be found in Kane’s undergraduate dynamics texts entitled Analytical

Elements of Mechanics volumes 1 and 2 [3, 4] published in 1959 and 1961, respectively In particular, in

Section 4.5.6 of [4], Kane states a “law of motion” containing a term referred to as the activity in R (a reference frame) of the gravitational and contact forces on P (a particular particle of interest) Kane’s focus on the activity of a set of forces was a significant step in the development of his more general dynamical method,

as is elaborated in Section 6.2 Also important to Kane’s approach to formulating dynamical equations washis desire to avoid what he viewed as the vagaries of the Principle of Virtual Work, particularly when applied

to the analysis of systems undergoing three-dimensional rotational motions Kane’s response to the need

to clarify the process of formulating equations of motion using the Principle of Virtual Work was one ofthe key factors that led to the development of his own approach to the generation of dynamical equations.Although the application of Kane’s method has clear advantages over other methods of formulatingdynamical equations [5], the importance of Kane’s method only became widely recognized as the spaceindustry of the 1960s and 1970s drove the need to model and simulate ever more complex dynamicalsystems and as the capabilities of digital computers increased geometrically while computational costsconcomitantantly decreased In the 1980s and early 1990s, a number of algorithms were developed forthe dynamic analysis of multibody systems (references [6–9] provide comprehensive overviews of vari-ous forms of these dynamical methods), based on variations of the dynamical principles developed byNewton, Euler, Lagrange, and Kane During this same time, a number of algorithms lead to commerciallysuccessful computer programs [such as ADAMS (Automatic Dynamic Analysis of Mechanisms) [10],DADS (Dynamic Analysis and Design of Systems) [11], NEWEUL [12], SD/FAST [13], AUTOLEV [14],Pro/MECHANICA MOTION, and Working Model [15], to name just a few], many of which are still onthe market today As elaborated in Section 6.7, many of the most successful of these programs were eitherdirectly or indirectly influenced by Kane and his approach to dynamics

The widespread attention given to efficient dynamical methods and the development of commerciallysuccessful multibody dynamics programs set the stage for the application of Kane’s method to complexrobotic mechanisms Since the early 1980s, numerous papers have been written on the use of Kane’s method

in analyzing the dynamics of various robots and robotic devices (seeSection 6.6for brief summaries ofselected articles) These robots have incorporated revolute joints, prismatic joints, closed-loops, flexiblelinks, transmission mechanisms, gear backlash, joint clearance, nonholonomic constraints, and othercharacteristics of mechanical devices that have important dynamical consequences As evidenced by therange of articles described in Section 6.6, Kane’s method is often the method of choice when analyzingrobots with various forms and functions

The broad goal of this chapter is to provide an introduction to the application of Kane’s method to robotsand robotic devices It is essentially tutorial while also providing a limited survey of articles that addressrobot analysis using Kane’s method as well as descriptions of multipurpose dynamical analysis softwarepackages that are either directly or indirectly related to Kane’s approach to dynamics Although a briefdescription of the fundamental basis for Kane’s method and its relationship to Lagrange’s equations is given

in Section 6.2, the purpose of this chapter is not to enter into a prolonged discussion of the relationshipbetween Kane’s method and other similar dynamical methods, such as the “orthogonal complementmethod” (the interested reader is referred to references [16,17] for detailed commentary) or Jourdain’sprinciple (see “Kane’s equations or Jourdain’s principle?” by Piedboeuf [18] for further information and

a discussion of Jourdain’s original 1909 work entitled “Note on an analogue of Gauss’ principle of leastconstraint” in which he established the principle of virtual power) or Gibbs-Appell equations [interestedreaders are referred to a lively debate on the subject that appeared in volumes 10 (numbers 1 and 6), 12(1),

and 13(2) of the Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics from 1987 to 1990] The majority of this

chapter (Section 6.3, Section 6.4, and Section 6.5) is in fact devoted to providing a tutorial illustration ofthe application of Kane’s method to the dynamic analysis of two relatively simple robots: a two-degree-of-freedom planar robot with two revolute joints and a two-degree-of-freedom planar robot with onerevolute joint and one prismatic joint Extentions and modifications of these analyses that are facilitated

by the use of Kane’s method are also discussed as are special issues in the use of Kane’s method, such

as formulating linearized equations, generating equations of motion for systems subject to constraints,

Copyright © 2005 by CRC Press LLC

Kane’s Method in Robotics 6-3

and developing equations of motion for systems with continuous elastic elements, leading to a detailedanalysis of the two-degree-of-freedom planar robot with one revolute joint and one prismatic joint whenthe element traversing the prismatic joint is regarded as elastic

Following these tutorial sections, a brief summary of the range of applications of Kane’s method inrobotics is presented Although not meant to be an exhaustive list of publications involving the use of Kane’smethod in robotics, an indication of the popularity and widespread use of Kane’s method in robotics isprovided The evolution of modern commercially available dynamical analysis computer software is alsobriefly described as is the relationship that various programs have to either Kane’s method or more generalwork that Kane has contributed to the dynamics and robotics literature Through this chapter, it is hopedthat readers previously unfamiliar with Kane’s method will gain at least a flavor of its application Readersalready acquainted with Kane’s method will hopefully gain new insights into the method as well as havethe opportunity to recognize the large number of robotic problems in which Kane’s method can be used

6.2 The Essence of Kane’s Method

Kane’s contributions to dynamics have been not only to the development of “Kane’s method” and “Kane’sequations” but also to the clarity with which one can deal with basic kinematical principles (including theexplicit and careful accounting for the reference frames in which kinematical and dynamical relationshipsare developed), the definition of basic kinematical, and dynamical quantities (see, for example, Kane’spaper entitled “Teaching of Mechanics to Undergraduates” [19]), the careful deductive way in which hederives all equations from basic principles, and the algorithmic approach he prescribes for the development

of dynamical equations of motion for complex systems These are in addition to the fundamental elementsinherent in Kane’s method, which allow for a clear and convenient separation of kinematical and dynamicalconsiderations, the exclusion of nonworking forces, the use of generalized speeds to describe motion, thesystematic way in which constraints can be incorporated into an analysis, and the ease and confidencewith which linearized of equations of motion can be developed

Before considering examples of the use of Kane’s method in robotics, a simple consideration of the

essential basis for the method may be illuminating Those who have read and studied DYNAMICS: Theory

and Applications [20] will recognize that the details of Kane’s approach to dynamics and to Kane’s method

can obscure the fundamental concepts on which Kane’s method is based In Section 5.8 of the first edition of

DYNAMICS [21] (note that an equivalent section is not contained in DYNAMICS: Theory and Applications),

a brief discussion is given of the basis for “Lagrange’s form of D’Alembert’s principle” [Equation (6.1) in[21] and Equation (6.1) ofChapter 6in [20] where it is referred to as Kane’s dynamical equations] This section of DYNAMICS offers comments that are meant to “shed light” on Kane’s equations “by reference

to analogies between these equations and other, perhaps more familiar, relationships.” Section 5.8 of

DYNAMICS is entitled “The Activity and Activity-Energy Principles” and considers the development of

equations of motion for a single particle While the analysis of a single particle does not give full insightinto the advantages (and potential disadvantages) inherent in the use of Kane’s method, it does provide atleast a starting point for further discussion and for understanding the origins of Kane’s method

For a single particle P for which F is the resultant of all contact and body forces acting on P and for which

F∗is the inertia force for P in an inertial reference frame R (note that for a single particle, F∗is simply equal

to−ma, where m is the mass of P and a is the acceleration of P in R), D’Alembert’s principle states that

and then presents

as a statement of the activity principle for a single particle P for which A and A∗are called the activity

of force F and the inertia activity of the inertia force F∗, respectively (note that Kane refers to A∗as the

activity of the force F∗; here A∗is referred to the inertia activity to distinguish it from the activity A).

Kane points out that Equation (6.5) is a scalar equation, and thus it cannot “furnish sufficient

infor-mation for the solution in which P has more than one degree of freedom.” He continues by noting that

Equation (6.5) is weaker than Equation (6.1), which is equivalent to three scalar equations Equation (6.5)

does, however, possess one advantage over Equation (6.1) If F contains contributions from (unknown)

constraint forces, these forces will appear in Equation (6.1) and then need to be eliminated from the

final dynamical equation(s) of motion; whereas, in cases in which the components of F corresponding to

constraint directions are ultimately not of interest, they are automatically eliminated from Equation (6.5)

by the dot multiplication needed to produce A and A∗as given in Equation (6.3) and Equation (6.4).The essence of Kane’s method is thus to arrive at a procedure for formulating dynamical equations of

motion that, on the one hand, contain sufficient information for the solution of problems in which P has

more than one degree of freedom, and on the other hand, automatically eliminate unknown constraintforces To that end, Kane noted that one may replace Equation (6.2) with

where vr(r = 1, , n) are the partial velocities (seeSection 6.3for a definition of partial velocities) of P

in R and n is the number of degrees of freedom of P in R (note that the v r form a set of independent

quantities) Furthermore, if F r and F r∗are defined as

one can then write

F r + F∗

where Fr and F r∗are referred to as the r th generalized active force and the r th generalized inertia force for

P in R Although referred to in Kane’s earlier works, including [21], as Lagrange’s form of D’Alembert’s principle, Equation (6.9) has in recent years come to be known as Kane’s equations.

Using the expression for the generalized inertia force given in Equation (6.8) as a point of ture, the relationship between Kane’s equations and Lagrange’s equations can also be investigated FromEquation (6.8),

depar-F r∗= vr · F∗= vr· (−ma) = −mvr·dv

dt = −m2

d dt

which can be recognized as Lagrange’s equations of motion of the first kind.

6.3 Two DOF Planar Robot with Two Revolute Joints

In order to provide brief tutorials on the use of Kane’s method in deriving equations of motion and

to illustrate the steps that make up the application of Kane’s method, in this and the following section,the dynamical equations of motion for two simple robotic systems are developed The first system is a

Copyright © 2005 by CRC Press LLC

Kane’s Method in Robotics 6-5

TA

q1O

FIGURE 6.1 Two DOF planar robot with two revolute joints.

degree-of-freedom robot with two revolute joints moving in a vertical plane The second is a degree-of-freedom robot with one revolute and one prismatic joint moving in a horizontal plane Both ofthese robots have been chosen so as to be simple enough to give a clear illustration of the details of Kane’smethod without obscuring key points with excessive complexity

two-As mentioned at the beginning of Section 6.2, Kane’s method is very algorithmic and as a result is easilybroken down into discrete general steps These steps are listed below:

r Definition of preliminary information

r Introduction of generalized coordinates and speeds

r Development of requisite velocities and angular velocities

r Determination of partial velocities and partial angular velocities

r Development of requisite accelerations and angular accelerations

r Formulation of generalized inertia forces

r Formulation of generalized active forces

r Formulation of dynamical equations of motion by means of Kane’s equations

These steps will now be applied to the system shown in Figure 6.1 This system represents a very simplemodel of a two-degree-of-freedom robot moving in a vertical plane To simplify the system as much aspossible, the mass of each of the links of the robot has been modeled as being lumped into a single particle

actuator attached to A Unit vectors needed for the description of the motion of the system are n i, ai, and

bi (i= 1, 2, 3) Unit vectors n1 and n2are fixed in an inertial reference frame N, a1, and a2are fixed in A,

and b1and b2are fixed in B, as shown The third vector of each triad is perpendicular to the plane formed

by the other two such that each triad forms a right-handed set

6.3.2 Generalized Coordinates and Speeds

While even for simple systems there is an infinite number of possible choices for the generalized coordinatesthat describe a system’s configuration, generalized coordinates are usually selected based on physicalrelevance and analytical convenience Generalized coordinates for the system ofFigure 6.1that are both

relevant and convenient are the angles q1 and q2 The quantity q1measures the angle between an inertially

fixed horizontal line and a line fixed in A, and q2 measures the angle between a line fixed in A and a line fixed in B , both as shown.

Within the context of Kane’s method, a complete specification of the kinematics of a system requires the

introduction of quantities known as generalized speeds Generalized speeds are defined as any (invertible) linear combination of the time derivatives of the generalized coordinates and describe the motion of a system in a way analogous to the way that generalized coordinates describe the configuration of a system.

While, as for the generalized coordinates, there is an infinite number of possibilities for the generalizedspeeds describing the motion of a system, for the system at hand, reasonable generalized speeds (that willultimately lead to equations of motion based on a “joint space” description of the robot) are defined as

An alternate, and equally acceptable, choice for generalized speeds could have been the n1 and n2

compo-nents of the velocity of P2(this choice would lead to equations of motion in “operational space”) For acomprehensive discussion of guidelines for the selection of generalized speeds that lead to “exceptionallyefficient” dynamical equations for a large class of systems frequently encountered in robotics, see [22]

6.3.3 Velocities

The angular and translational velocities required for the development of the equations of motion for the

robot of Figure 6.1 are the angular velocities of bodies A and B as measured in reference frame N and the translational velocities of particles P1 and P2 in N With the choice of generalized speeds given above,

expressions for the angular velocities are

With all the requisite velocity expressions in hand, Kane’s method requires the identification of partial

velocities Partial velocities must be identified from the angular velocities of all nonmassless bodies and

of bodies acted upon by torques that ultimately contribute to the equations of motion (i.e., bodies actedupon by nonworking torques and nonworking sets of torques need not be considered) as well as fromthe translational velocities of all nonmassless particles and of points acted upon by forces that ultimatelycontribute to the equations of motion These partial velocities are easily identified and are simply thecoefficients of the generalized speeds in expressions for the angular and translational velocities For thesystem of Figure 6.1, the partial velocities are determined by inspection from Equation (6.14) through(6.17) The resulting partial velocities are listed inTable 6.1,where ω A

r is the r th partial angular velocity

of A in N, v P1

r is the r th partial translational velocity of P1 in N, etc.

Copyright © 2005 by CRC Press LLC

6-8 Robotics and Automation Handbook

which they are applied For the system at hand, therefore, one can write the generalized active forces Fras

applying an external force F En1+ F E

yn2to the distal end of the robot (at the location of P2), one simply

determines additional contributions F Ext

r to the generalized active forces given by

F r Damp = ω A

r · [−bt1 u1a3+ bt2(u1 + u2)b3] + ω B

r · [−bt2(u1 + u2)b3] (r = 1, 2) (6.28)

where bt1 and bt2are viscous damping coefficients at the first and second joints

Another consideration that often arises in robotics is the relationship between formulations of equations

of motion in joint space and operational space As mentioned at the point at which generalized speedswere defined, the above derivation could easily have produced equations corresponding to operational

space simply by defining the generalized speeds to be the n1 and n2components of the velocity of P2andthen using this other set of generalized speeds to define partial velocities analogous to those appearing inTable 6.1 A systematic approach to directly converting between the joint space equations in Equation (6.26)and corresponding operational space equations is described in Section 6.5.2

6.4 Two-DOF Planar Robot with One Revolute Joint

and One Prismatic Joint

The steps outlined at the beginning of the previous section will now be applied to the system shown in

Figure 6.2.This system represents a simple model of a two-degree-of-freedom robot with one revolute andone prismatic joint moving in a horizontal plane While still relatively simple, this system is significantlymore complicated than the one analyzed in the preceding section and gives a fuller understanding of issues

where ω A is the angular velocity of A in reference frame N and AvC∗is the velocity of C∗as measured in

body A.

6.4.3 Velocities

The angular and translational velocities required for the development of equations of motion for the robot

are the angular velocities of A, B , and C in N, and the velocities of points A∗ P , B∗, and C∗in N.

With the choice of generalized speeds given above, expressions for the angular velocities are

P is determined from the formula for the velocity of a single point moving on a rigid body

P , this formula is expressed as

andAvP P in A The velocity of v A P, for the problem at hand, is simply equal to vP

P in A is determined with reference to Figure 6.2, as well as the definition of u2given inEquation (6.30), and is

Kane’s Method in Robotics 6-11

TABLE 6.2 Partial Velocities for Robot of

As explained in the previous section, partial velocities are simply the coefficients of the generalized speeds

in the expressions for the angular and translational velocities and here are determined by inspection fromEquations (6.31) through (6.34), (6.37), and (6.40) through (6.42) The resulting partial velocities are

listed in Table 6.2, where ω r A is the r th partial angular velocity of A in N, v r A∗ is the r th partial linear velocity of A∗in N, etc.

6.4.5 Accelerations

In order to complete the development of requisite kinematical quantities governing the motion of the

robot, one must develop expressions for the angular accelerations of bodies A, B , and C in N as well as for the translational accelerations of A∗, B∗, and C∗in N The angular accelerations can be determined

by differentiating Equations (6.31) through (6.33) in N Since the unit vector a3 is fixed in N, this is

straightforward and produces

where α A , α B , and α C are the angular acceleration of A, B , and C in N.

The translational accelerations can be determined by direct differentiation of Equation (6.34), Equation

(6.41), and Equation (6.42) The acceleration of A∗in N is obtained from

derivative of vA∗in N in terms of its derivative in A plus terms that account for the rotation of A relative

to N Evaluation of Equation (6.46) produces

6.4.6 Generalized Inertia Forces

In general, the generalized inertia forces F r∗in a reference frame N for a rigid body B that is part of a system with n degrees of freedom are given by

(F r∗)B= v∗

r· R∗+ ωr· T∗ (r = 1, , n) (6.50)

where v∗r is the r th partial velocity of the mass center of B in N, ω r is the r th partial angular velocity of B

in N, and R∗and T∗are the inertia force for B in N and the inertia torque for B in N, respectively The inertia force for a body B is simply

For the problem at hand, generalized inertia forces are most easily formed by first formulating them

individually for each of the bodies A, B , and C and then substituting the individual results into

The resulting generalized inertia forces for A, formulated with reference to Equation (6.50), Equation

(6.54), and Equation (6.55), as well as the partial velocities ofTable 6.2,are

Copyright © 2005 by CRC Press LLC

Kane’s Method in Robotics 6-13

6.4.7 Generalized Active Forces

Since nonworking forces, or sets of forces, make no net contribution to the generalized active forces, one

need only consider the torque TA and the force F A /B to determine the generalized active forces for the

robot ofFigure 6.2.One can, therefore, write the generalized active forces Fras

F r = ω A

r · TAa3+ vPˆ

r · F A /Ba1 + vP

r · (−FA /Ba1) (r = 1, 2) (6.62)Substituting fromTable 6.2into Equation (6.62) produces

as well as studies of the efficacy of Kane’s method in the analysis of robotic mechanisms such as in [24, 25],have shown that Kane’s method is both analytically convenient for hand analyses as well as computationallyefficient when used as the basis for general purpose or specialized robotic system simulation programs

6.5 Special Issues in Kane’s Method

Kane’s method is applicable to a wide range of robotic and nonrobotic systems In this section, attention isfocused on ways in which Kane’s method can be applied to systems that have specific characteristics or forwhich equations of motion in a particular form are desired Specifically, described below are approachesthat can be utilized when linearized dynamical equations of motion are to be developed, when equationsare sought for systems that are subject to kinematical constraints, and when systems that have continuouselastic elements are analyzed

6.5.1 Linearized Equations

As discussed in Section 6.4 of [20], dynamical equations of motion that have been linearized in all or some

of the configuration or motion variables (i.e., generalized coordinates or generalized speeds) are oftenuseful either for the study of the stability of motion or for the development of linear control schemes.Moreover, linearized differential equations have the advantage of being easier to solve than nonlinear oneswhile still yielding information that may be useful for restricted classes of motion of a system In situations

in which fully nonlinear equations for a system are already in hand, one develops linearized equationssimply by expanding in a Taylor series all terms containing the variables in which linearization is to beperformed and then eliminating all nonlinear contributions However, in situations in which linearizeddynamical equations are to be formulated directly without first developing fully nonlinear ones, or in

situations in which fully nonlinear equations cannot be formulated, one can efficiently generate linear

dynamical equations with Kane’s method by proceeding as follows: First, as was done for the illustrativesystems of Section 6.3 and Section 6.4, develop fully nonlinear expressions for the requisite angularand translational velocities of the particles and rigid bodies comprising the system under consideration

These nonlinear expressions are then used to determine nonlinear partial angular velocities and partialtranslational velocities by inspection Once the nonlinear partial velocities have been identified, however,they are no longer needed in their nonlinear form and these partial velocities can be linearized Moreover,with the correct linearized partial velocities available, the previously determined nonlinear angular andtranslational velocities can also be linearized and then used to construct linearized angular and translationalaccelerations These linearized expressions can then be used in the procedure outlined in Section 6.3for formulating Kane’s equations of motion while only retaining linearized terms in each expressionthroughout the process The significant advantage of this approach is that the transition from nonlinearexpressions to completely linearized ones can be made at the very early stages of an analysis, thus avoidingthe need to retain terms that ultimately make no contribution to linearized equations of motion Whilethis is important for any system for which linearized equations are desired, it is particularly relevant tocontinuous systems for which fully nonlinear equations cannot be formulated in closed form (such as forthe system described later in Section 6.5.3).

A specific example of the process of developing linearized equations of motion using Kane’s method isgiven in Section 6.4 of [20] Another example of issues associated with developing linearized dynamicalequations using Kane’s method is given below in Section 6.5.3 on continuous systems Although a relativelycomplicated example, it demonstrates the systematic approach of Kane’s method that guarantees that allthe terms that should appear in linearized equations actually do The ability to confidently and efficientlyformulate linearized equations of motion for continuous systems is essential to ensure (as discussed atlength in works such as [26,27]) that linear phenomena, such as “centrifugal stiffening” in rotating beamsystems, are corrected and taken into account

6.5.2 Systems Subject to Constraints

Another special case in which Kane’s method can be used to particular advantage is in systems subject toconstraints This case is useful when equations of motion have already been formulated, and new equations

of motion reflecting the presence of additional constraints are needed, and allows the new equations to

be written as a recombination of terms comprising the original equations This approach avoids the need

to introduce the constraints as kinematical equations at an early stage of the analysis or to increase thenumber of equations through the introduction of unknown forces Introducing unknown constraint forces

is disadvantageous unless the constraint forces themselves are of interest, and the early introduction ofkinematical constraint equations typically unnecessarily complicates the development of the dynamicalequations This approach is also useful in situations after equations of motion have been formulatedand additional constraints are applied to a system, for example, when design objectives change, when asystem’s topology changes during its motion, or when a system is replaced with a simpler one as a means ofchecking a numerical simulation In such situations, premature introduction of constraints deprives one

of the opportunity to make maximum use of expressions developed in connection with the unconstrainedsystem The approach described below, which provides a general statement of how dynamical equationsgoverning constrained systems can be generated, is based on the work of Wampler et al [28]

In general, if a system described by Equation (6.9) is subjected to m independent constraints such that the number of degrees of freedom decreases from n to n − m, the independent generalized speeds for the system u1, , u n must be replaced by a new set of independent generalized speeds u1, , u n−m Theequations of motion for the constrained system can then be generated by considering the problem as acompletely new one, or alternatively, by making use of the following, one can make use of many of theexpressions that were generated in forming the original set of equations

Given an n degree-of-freedom system possessing n independent partial velocities, n generalized inertia forces F r∗, and n generalized active forces Fr, each associated with the n independent generalized speeds

u1, , u n that are subject to m linearly independent constraints that can be written in the form

Kane’s Method in Robotics 6-15

P2, P3

1

n2_ _

FIGURE 6.3 Two-DOF planar robot “grasping” an object.

where the ul (l = 1, , n − m) are a set of independent generalized speeds governing the constrained

system [α kl andβ k (l = 1, , n − m; k = n − m + 1, , n) are functions solely of the generalized

coordinates and time], the equations of motion for the constrained system are written as

As an example of the above procedure, consider again the two-degree-of-freedom system ofFigure 6.1

If this robot were to grasp a particle P3that slides in a frictionless horizontal slot, as shown in Figure 6.3,the system of the robot and particle, which when unconnected would have a total of three degrees offreedom, is reduced to one having only one degree of freedom The two constraints arise as a result of the

fact that when P3 is grasped, the velocity of P3 is equal to the velocity of P1 If the velocity of P3beforebeing grasped is given by

where u3 is a generalized speed chosen to describe the motion of P3, then the two constraint equations

that are in force after grasping can be expressed as

where s1, c1, s12, and c12are equal to sin q1, cos q1, sin(q1 +q2), and cos(q1 +q2), respectively Choosing u1

as the independent generalized speed for the constrained system, expressions for the dependent generalized

speeds u2 and u3are written as

where s2 is equal to sin q2 and where the coefficients of u1in Equation (6.71) and Equation (6.72) correspond

to the termsα21andα31defined in the general form for constraint equations in Equation (6.66) Noting

that the generalized inertia and active forces for P3before the constraints are applied are given by