Skip to main content
×
×
Home

Analysis of path following and obstacle avoidance for multiple wheeled robots in a shared workspace

  • M. Hassan Tanveer (a1), Carmine T. Recchiuto (a1) and Antonio Sgorbissa (a1)
Summary

The article presents the experimental evaluation of an integrated approach for path following and obstacle avoidance, implemented on wheeled robots. Wheeled robots are widely used in many different contexts, and they are usually required to operate in partial or total autonomy: in a wide range of situations, having the capability to follow a predetermined path and avoiding unexpected obstacles is extremely relevant. The basic requirement for an appropriate collision avoidance strategy is to sense or detect obstacles and make proper decisions when the obstacles are nearby. According to this rationale, the approach is based on the definition of the path to be followed as a curve on the plane expressed in its implicit form f(x, y) = 0, which is fed to a feedback controller for path following. Obstacles are modeled through Gaussian functions that modify the original function, generating a resulting safe path which – once again – is a curve on the plane expressed as f′(x, y) = 0: the deformed path can be fed to the same feedback controller, thus guaranteeing convergence to the path while avoiding all obstacles. The features and performance of the proposed algorithm are confirmed by experiments in a crowded area with multiple unicycle-like robots and moving persons.

Copyright
Corresponding author
*Corresponding author. E-mail: muhammadhassan.tanveer@dibris.unige.it
References
Hide All
1. Matveev, A. S., Teimoori, H. and Savkin, A. V., “A method for guidance and control of an autonomous vehicle in problems of border patrolling and obstacle avoidance,” Automatica 47 (3), 515524 (2011).
2. Bonin-Font, F., Ortiz, A. and Oliver, G., “Visual navigation for mobile robots: A survey,” J. Intell. Robot. Syst. 53 (3), 263 (2008).
3. Mosteo, A. R., Montijano, E. and Tardioli, D., “Optimal role and position assignment in multi-robot freely reachable formations,” Automatica 81, 305313 (2017).
4. Oyler, D. W., Kabamba, P. T. and Girard, A. R., “Pursuit–evasion games in the presence of obstacles,” Automatica 65, 111 (2016).
5. Doosthoseini, A., Nielsen, C., “Coordinated path following for unicycles: A nested invariant sets approach,” Automatica 60, 1729 (2015).
6. Kantaros, Y. and Zavlanos, M. M., “Distributed communication-aware coverage control by mobile sensor networks,” Automatica 63, 209220 (2016).
7. Li, X., Yang, H., Wang, J. and Sun, D., “Design of a robust unified controller for cell manipulation with a robot-aided optical tweezers system,” Automatica 55, 279286 (2015).
8. Li, X., Sun, D. and Yang, J., “A bounded controller for multirobot navigation while maintaining network connectivity in the presence of obstacles,” Automatica 49 (1), 285292 (2013).
9. Matveev, A. S., Hoy, M. and Savkin, A. V., “A method for reactive navigation of nonholonomic under-actuated robots in maze-like environments,” Automatica 49 (5), 12681274 (2013).
10. Savkin, A. V. and Wang, C., “Seeking a path through the crowd: Robot navigation in unknown dynamic environments with moving obstacles based on an integrated environment representation,” Robot. Auton. Syst. 62 (10), 15681580 (2014).
11. Xiao-Qing, L., Yao-Nan, W. and Jian-Xu, M., “Nonlinear control for multi-agent formations with delays in noisy environments,” Acta Autom. Sin. 40 (12), 29592967 (2014).
12. Su, Y., “Leader-following rendezvous with connectivity preservation and disturbance rejection via internal model approach,” Automatica 57, 203212 (2015).
13. Sun, X. and Cassandras, C. G., “Optimal dynamic formation control of multi-agent systems in constrained environments,” Automatica 73, 169179 (2016).
14. Tian-Tian, Y., Zhi-Yuan, L., Hong, C. and Run, P., “Formation control and obstacle avoidance for multiple mobile robots,” Acta Autom. Sin. 34 (5), 588593 (2008).
15. Malisoff, M., Sizemore, R. and Zhang, F., “Adaptive planar curve tracking control and robustness analysis under state constraints and unknown curvature,” Automatica 75, 133143 (2017).
16. Morro, A., Sgorbissa, A. and Zaccaria, R., “Path following for unicycle robots with an arbitrary path curvature,” IEEE Trans. Robot. 27 (5), 10161023 (2011).
17. Michalek, M., “A highly scalable path-following controller for n-trailers with off-axle hitching,” Control Eng. Pract. 29, 6173 (2014).
18. Sgorbissa, A. and Zaccaria, R., “3d Path Following with No Bounds on the Path Curvature through Surface Intersection,” Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Taipei, Taiwan, 2010.
19. Khatib, O., “Real-time obstacle avoidance for manipulators and mobile robots,” Int. J. Robot. Res. 5 (1), 9098 (1986).
20. Borenstein, J. and Koren, Y., “The vector field histogram-fast obstacle avoidance for mobile robots,” IEEE Trans. Robot. Autom. 7 (3), 278288 (1991).
21. Savkin, A. V. and Wang, C., “A simple biologically inspired algorithm for collision-free navigation of a unicycle-like robot in dynamic environments with moving obstacles,” Robotica 31 (06), 9931001 (2013).
22. Nguyen, P. D. H., Recchiuto, C. T. and Sgorbissa, A., “Real-time path generation and obstacle avoidance for multirotors: A novel approach,” J. Intell. Robot. Syst. 89 (1), 2749 (2018).
23. Possieri, C. and Teel, A. R., “Lq Optimal Control for a Class of Hybrid Systems,” Proceedings of the IEEE 55th Conference on Decision and Control (CDC), IEEE (2016) pp. 604–609.
24. Hoy, M., Matveev, A. S. and Savkin, A. V., “Algorithms for collision-free navigation of mobile robots in complex cluttered environments: A survey,” Robotica 33 (03), 463497 (2015).
25. Minguez, J., Lamiraux, F. and Laumond, J.-P., “Motion Planning and Obstacle Avoidance,” In: Springer Handbook of Robotics (Springer, 2016) pp. 1177–1202.
26. Savkin, A. V., Matveev, A. S., Hoy, M. and Wang, C., Safe Robot Navigation Among Moving and Steady Obstacles (Butterworth-Heinemann, 2015).
27. Garone, E. et al., “Reference and command governors for systems with constraints: A survey on theory and applications,” Automatica 75, 306328 (2017).
28. Atınç, G. M., Stipanović, D. M. and Voulgaris, P. G., “Supervised coverage control of multi-agent systems,” Automatica 50 (11), 29362942 (2014).
29. Zhang, K., Sprinkle, J. and Sanfelice, R. G., “A Hybrid Model Predictive Controller for Path Planning and Path Following,” Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE 6th International Conference on Cyber-Physical Systems, ACM (2015) pp. 139–148.
30. Brüggemann, S., Possieri, C., Poveda, J. I. and Teel, A. R., “Robust Constrained Model Predictive Control with Persistent Model Adaptation,” Proceedings of the IEEE 55th Conference on Decision and Control (CDC), IEEE (2016) pp. 2364–2369.
31. Fagiano, L. and Teel, A. R., “Model predictive control with generalized terminal state constraint,” IFAC Proc. 45 (17), 299304 (2012).
32. Yu-Geng, X., De-Wei, L. and Shu, L., “Model predictive control⣠status and challenges,” Acta Autom. Sin. 39 (3), 222236 (2013).
33. Liberzon, D., Calculus of Variations and Optimal Control Theory: A Concise Introduction (Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, 2012).
34. Pin, G., Raimondo, D. M., Magni, L. and Parisini, T., “Robust model predictive control of nonlinear systems with bounded and state-dependent uncertainties,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Control 54 (7), 16811687 (2009).
35. Goodwin, G. C., Middleton, R. H., Seron, M. M. and Campos, B., “Application of nonlinear model predictive control to an industrial induction heating furnace,” Annu. Rev. Control 37 (2), 271277 (2013).
36. Rana, M. S., Pota, H. R. and Petersen, I. R., “The design of model predictive control for an afm and its impact on piezo nonlinearities,” Eur. J. Control 20 (4), 188198 (2014).
37. Kouzoupis, D., Zanelli, A., Peyrl, H. and Ferreau, H., “Towards Proper Assessment of qp Algorithms for Embedded Model Predictive Control,” Proceedings of the Control Conference (ECC), 2015 European, IEEE (2015) pp. 2609–2616.
38. Kim, W., Kim, D., Yi, K. and Kim, H. J., “Development of a path-tracking control system based on model predictive control using infrastructure sensors,” Veh. Syst. Dyn. 50 (6), 10011023 (2012).
39. Parys, R. V. and Pipeleers, G., “Distributed MPC for multi-vehicle systems moving in formation,” Robot. Autonom. Syst. 97, 144152 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.robot.2017.08.009
40. Franzè, G. and Lucia, W., “An obstacle avoidance model predictive control scheme for mobile robots subject to nonholonomic constraints: A sum-of-squares approach,” J. Franklin Inst. 352 (6), 23582380 (2015).
41. Nascimento, T. P., Conceicao, A. G. and Moreira, A. P., “Multi-robot systems formation control with obstacle avoidance,” IFAC Proc. Volumes 47 (3), 57035708 (2014). https://doi.org/10.3182/20140824-6-za-1003.01848
42. Bououden, S., Chadli, M. and Karimi, H. R., “An ant colony optimization-based fuzzy predictive control approach for nonlinear processes,” Inform. Sci. 299, 143158 (2015).
43. Fiorini, P. and Shiller, Z., “Motion Planning in Dynamic Environments using the Relative Velocity Paradigm,” Proceedings IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, IEEE (1993) pp. 560–565.
44. Kuwata, Y., Wolf, M. T., Zarzhitsky, D. and Huntsberger, T. L., “Safe maritime autonomous navigation with colregs, using velocity obstacles,” IEEE J. Ocean. Eng. 39 (1), 110119 (2014).
45. Large, F., Laugier, C. and Shiller, Z., “Navigation among moving obstacles using the NLVO: Principles and applications to intelligent vehicles,” Auton. Robots 19 (2), 159171 (2005).
46. Savkin, A. V. and Wang, C., “A simple biologically inspired algorithm for collision-free navigation of a unicycle-like robot in dynamic environments with moving obstacles,” Robotica 31 (06), 9931001 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1017/s0263574713000313
47. Montiel, O., Orozco-Rosas, U. and Sepúlveda, R., “Path planning for mobile robots using bacterial potential field for avoiding static and dynamic obstacles,” Expert Syst. Appl. 42 (12), 51775191 (2015).
48. Mujahed, M., Fischer, D. and Mertsching, B., “Admissible gap navigation: A new collision avoidance approach,” Robot. Auton. Syst. 103, 93110 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.robot.2018.02.008
49. Xu, Z., Hess, R. and Schilling, K., “Constraints of potential field for obstacle avoidance on car-like mobile robots,” IFAC Proc. Volumes 45 (4), 169175 (2012). https://doi.org/10.3182/20120403-3-de-3010.00077
50. Korayem, M. and Nekoo, S., “The SDRE control of mobile base cooperative manipulators: Collision free path planning and moving obstacle avoidance,” Robot. Auton. Syst. 86, 86105 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.robot.2016.09.003
51. Sgorbissa, A., “Integrated robot planning, obstacle avoidance, and path following in 2D and 3D: Ground, aerial, and underwater vehicles” (2017) –doi:10.13140/rg.2.2.14838.80969.
52. Al-Jarrah, R., Al-Jarrah, M. and Roth, H., “A novel edge detection algorithm for mobile robot path planning,” J. Robot. 2018, 112 (2018).
53. Deepu, R., Honnaraju, B. and Murali, S., “Path generation for robot navigation using a single camera,” Proc. Comput. Sci. 46, 14251432 (2015).
54. Falconi, R., Sabattini, L., Secchi, C., Fantuzzi, C. and Melchiorri, C., “Edge-weighted consensus-based formation control strategy with collision avoidance,” Robotica 33 (2), 332347 (2015).
55. Fox, D., Burgard, W. and Thrun, S., “The dynamic window approach to collision avoidance,” IEEE Robot. Autom. Mag. 4 (1), 2333 (1997).
56. Arras, K. O., Persson, J., Tomatis, N. and Siegwart, R., “Real-Time Obstacle Avoidance for Polygonal Robots with a Reduced Dynamic Window,” Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, ICRA'02, Vol. 3, IEEE (2002) pp. 3050–3055.
57. Ogren, P. and Leonard, N. E., “A convergent dynamic window approach to obstacle avoidance,” IEEE Trans. Robot. 21 (2), 188195 (2005).
58. Damas, B. and Santos-Victor, J., “Avoiding Moving Obstacles: The Forbidden Velocity Map,” Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, IROS 2009, IEEE (2009) pp. 4393–4398.
59. Lapierre, L., Zapata, R. and Lepinay, P., “Simulatneous Path Following and Obstacle Avoidance Control of a Unicycle-Type Robot,” Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, IEEE (2007) pp. 2617–2622.
60. Aicardi, M., Casalino, G., Bicchi, A. and Balestrino, A., “Closed loop steering of unicycle like vehicles via Lyapunov techniques,” IEEE Robot. Autom. Mag. 2 (1), 2735 (1995).
61. Soetanto, D., Lapierre, L. and Pascoal, A., “Adaptive, Non-Singular Path-Following Control of Dynamic Wheeled Robots,” Proceedings of the 42nd IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, 2003, Vol. 2, IEEE (2003) pp. 1765–1770.
62. Miao, H. and Tian, Y.-C., “Dynamic robot path planning using an enhanced simulated annealing approach,” Appl. Math. Comput. 222, 420437 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amc.2013.07.022
63. Mohammadi, A., Rahimi, M. and Suratgar, A. A., “A New Path Planning and Obstacle Avoidance Algorithm in Dynamic Environment,” Proceedings of the 22nd Iranian Conference on Electrical Engineering (ICEE), IEEE (2014).
64. Mylvaganam, T. and Sassano, M., “Autonomous collision avoidance for wheeled mobile robots using a differential game approach,” Eur. J. Control 40 5361 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejcon.2017.11.005
65. Hsien-I, L., “2d-span resampling of bi-RRT in dynamic path planning,” Int. J. Autom. Smart Technol. 4 (4), 3948 (2015). https://doi.org/10.5875/ausmt.v5i1.837
66. Moon, C.-b. and Chung, W., “Kinodynamic planner dual-tree RRT (dt-rrt) for two-wheeled mobile robots using the rapidly exploring random tree,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 62 (2), 10801090 (2015).
67. Chwa, D., “Robust distance-based tracking control of wheeled mobile robots using vision sensors in the presence of kinematic disturbances,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 63 (10), 61726183 (2016). doi:10.1109/TIE.2016.2590378.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Robotica
  • ISSN: 0263-5747
  • EISSN: 1469-8668
  • URL: /core/journals/robotica
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Keywords

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed