## 6 Conclusions
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & \begin{tabular}{c} **Joint Serial** \\ **Number** \\ \end{tabular} & \(|\mathbf{a}_{mean\_case1}|\) & \(|\mathbf{a}_{mean\_case2}|\) & \
\begin{tabular}{c} **Percentage** \\ **Change** \\ \end{tabular} & \(|\mathbf{a}_{max\_case1}|\) & \(|\mathbf{a}_{max\_case2}|\) &
\begin{tabular}{c} **Percentage** \\ **Change** \\ \end{tabular} \\ \hline \multirow{10}{*}{Left} & Joint 1 & 0.0393 & 0.0081 & \(\downarrow\)79.39\% & 6.6119 & 4.6136 & \(\downarrow\)30.22\% \\  & Joint 2 & 0.0538 & 0.0083 & \(\downarrow\)84.57\% & 7.0834 & 5.6161 & \(\downarrow\)20.71\% \\  & Joint 3 & 0.0494 & 0.0331 & \(\downarrow\)33.00\% & 8.5732 & 7.0212 & \(\downarrow\)18.1\% \\ arm & Joint 4 & 0.1672 & 0.0218 & \(\downarrow\)86.96\% & 15.8264 & 13.0212 & \(\downarrow\)17.72\% \\  & Joint 5 & 0.1538 & 0.0123 & \(\downarrow\)92.00\% & 17.8643 & 16.2621 & \(\downarrow\)8.97\% \\  & Joint 6 & 0.1897 & 0.0458 & \(\downarrow\)75.00\% & 16.8167 & 11.3236 & \(\downarrow\)32.66\% \\  & Joint 1 & 0.0130 & 0.0068 & \(\downarrow\)47.69\% & 15.5193 & 12.8832 & \(\downarrow\)16.99\% \\  & Joint 2 & 0.1771 & 0.1027 & \(\downarrow\)42.01\% & 16.9412 & 14.2035 & \(\downarrow\)16.16\% \\ Right & Joint 3 & 0.0755 & 0.0143 & \(\downarrow\)81.06\% & 7.9407 & 6.0935 & \(\downarrow\)23.26\% \\ arm & Joint 4 & 0.1496 & 0.0104 & \(\downarrow\)93.05\% & 19.2833 & 8.4394 & \(\downarrow\)56.23\% \\  & Joint 5 & 0.1039 & 0.0242 & \(\downarrow\)76.71\% & 15.5865 & 12.4621 & \(\downarrow\)20.05\% \\  & Joint 6 & 0.0850 & 0.0602 & \(\downarrow\)29.18\% & 9.6239 & 7.1614 & \(\downarrow\)25.59\% \\ Drive where & Left wheel & 1.7202 & 1.2085 & \(\downarrow\)29.75\% & 255.8227 & 199.1425 & \(\downarrow\)22.16\% \\  & Right wheel & 2.8519 & 2.0278 & \(\downarrow\)28.9\% & 423.9443 & 350.3461 & \(\downarrow\)17.36\% \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} Note: The unit of angular acceleration is (\({}^{\circ}\)/s), “\({}_{1}\)” represents the percentage decline in case 2 over case 1.  
\end{table} 
Table 7: The effects of different stability constraints on joint acceleration. **Author Contributions:** The collection of materials and summarization of this article is done by [PERSON], [PERSON] and [PERSON]. The simulation and analysis are done by [PERSON], [PERSON] and [PERSON]. The conceptual ideas, methodology, and guidance for the research are provided by [PERSON] All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript. **Funding:** This work was supported by Key Research and Development Program of Anhui Province (2022i01020015), the Opening Project of Shanghai Robot R&D and Transformation Functional Platform (K2020468), Shanghai Municipal of Science and Technology Commission under Grant (21 SQBS00300), National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 82227807). **Institutional Review Board Statement:** Not applicable. **Informed Consent Statement:** Not applicable. **Data Availability Statement:** The data used in this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. **Conflicts of Interest:** The authors declare no conflict of interest. **Nomenclature** \begin{tabular}{l l}
**R** & rotation matrix \\ \(v_{i}\) & linear velocity \\ \(\omega_{i}\) & angular velocity \\ \(a_{i}\) & linear velocity vector \\ \(a_{i}\) & angular velocity vector \\ \(f_{i}\) & constraint force vector \\ \(m_{i}\) & constraint torque vector \\ \(M_{i}\) & generalized mass matrix \\ \end{tabular}