Hostname: page-component-77c78cf97d-tlp4c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-04T03:12:06.029Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Path planning for simple wheeled robots: sub-Riemannian and elastic curves on SE(2)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 June 2013

Craig Maclean  and
James D. Biggs
Craig Maclean*
Affiliation:
Advanced Space Concepts Laboratory, Department of Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow G4 0LT, UK
James D. Biggs
Affiliation:
Advanced Space Concepts Laboratory, Department of Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow G4 0LT, UK
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: craig.maclean@strath.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

This paper presents a motion planning method for a simple wheeled robot in two cases: (i) where translational and rotational speeds are arbitrary, and (ii) where the robot is constrained to move forwards at unit speed. The motions are generated by formulating a constrained optimal control problem on the Special Euclidean group SE(2). An application of Pontryagin's maximum principle for arbitrary speeds yields an optimal Hamiltonian which is completely integrable in terms of Jacobi elliptic functions. In the unit speed case, the rotational velocity is described in terms of elliptic integrals, and the expression for the position is reduced to quadratures. Reachable sets are defined in the arbitrary speed case, and a numerical plot of the time-limited reachable sets is presented for the unit speed case. The resulting analytical functions for the position and orientation of the robot can be parametrically optimised to match prescribed target states within the reachable sets. The method is shown to be easily adapted to obstacle avoidance for static obstacles in a known environment.

Keywords

Path planningMotion planningOptimal controlGeometric controlWheeled robots

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Robotica , Volume 31 , Issue 8 , December 2013 , pp. 1285 - 1297
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1.Jurdjevic, V., Geometric Control Theory (Advanced Studies in Mathematics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1997) p. 52.Google Scholar
2.Bloch, A. M., Nonholonomic Mechanics and Control (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany, 2003).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.Leonard, N. and Krishnaprasad, P. S., “Motion control of drift free, left-invariant systems on Lie groups,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Control 40, 1539–1554 (1995).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Biggs, J. and Horri, N., “Optimal geometric motion planning for spin-stabilized spacecraft,” Syst. Control Lett. 61 (4), 609–616 (2012).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5.Biggs, J., “Optimal Path Planning for Nonholonomic Robotics Systems via Parametric Optimisation,” Proceedings of TAROS 2011, Sheffield, UK (2011).Google Scholar
6.Boltyanskii, V. G., Gamkrelidze, R. V. and Pontryagin, L.S., “Towards a theory of optimal processes,” Reports Acad. Sci. USSR 110 (1), 7–10 (1956).Google Scholar
7.Dubins, L. E., “On curves of minimal length with a constraint on average curvature, and with prescribed initial and terminal positions and tangents,” Am. J. Math. 79, 497–516 (1957).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8.LaValle, S. M., Planning Algorithms (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9.Jurdjevic, V. and Monroy-Perez, F., “Variational Problems on Lie Groups and their Homogeneous Space: Elastic Curves, Tops, and Constrained Geodesic Problems,” In: Contemporary Trends in Nonlinear Geometric Control Theory and Its Applications (Anzaldo-Meneses, A., Bonnard, B., Gauthier, J. P. and Monroy-Perez, F., eds.) (World Scientific, Singapore, 2002) pp. 3–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10.Reeds, J. A. and Shepp, L. A., “Optimal paths for a car that goes both forwards and backwards,” Pac. J. Math. 145 (2), 367–393 (1990).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11.Tsourdos, A., White, B. A. and Shanmugavel, M., Cooperative Path Planning of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (Wiley, Somerset, New Jersey, 2011).Google Scholar
12.Mahmoudian, N. and Woolsey, C., “Underwater Glider Motion Control,” In: Proceedings of the 47th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, Cancun, Mexico (2008) pp. 552–557.Google Scholar
13.Scheuer, A. and Fraichard, Th., “Continuous Curvature Path Planning for Car-Like Vehicles,” In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Montbonnot-Saint-Martin, France, vol. 2 (1997) pp. 997–1003.Google Scholar
14.Scheuer, A. and Fraichard, Th., “Collision-Free and Continuous-Curvature Path Planning for Car-Like Robots,” In: Proceedings of International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Albuquerque, New Mexico (1997) pp. 867–873.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15.Fraichard, Th. and Ahuactzin, J. M. “Smooth Path Planning for Cars,” In: Proceedings of International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Seoul, South Korea, vol. 4 (2001) pp. 3722–3727.Google Scholar
16.Murray, R. and Sastry, S., “Steering Nonholonomic Systems Using Sinusoids,” In: Proceedings of 29th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, Honolulu, Hawaii (1990) pp. 2097–2101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17.Brockett, R. W., “Control Theory and Singular Riemannian Geometry,” In: New Directions in Applied Mathematics (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany, 1981) pp. 11–27.Google Scholar
18.Kelly, A. and Nagy, B., “Reactive nonholonomic trajectory generation via parametric optimal control,” Int. J. Rob. Res. 22 (7–8), 583–601 (2003).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19.Murray, R., Li, Z. and Sastry, S., A Mathematical Introduction to Robotic Manipulation (CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, 1994).Google Scholar
20.Canny, J. F., The Complexity of Robot Motion Planning (MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1988).Google Scholar
21.Latombe, J. C., Robot Motion Planning (Kluwer, Boston, Massachusetts, 1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22.Brockett, R. W. and Dai, L., “Non-Holonomic Kinematics and the Role of Elliptic Functions in Constructive Controllability,” In: Nonholonomic Motion Planning (Kluwer, Boston, Massachusetts, 1993) pp. 1–21.Google Scholar
23.Choset, H., Lynch, K., Hutchinson, S., Kantor, G., Burgard, W., Kavraki, L. and Thrun, S., Principles of Robot Motion – Theory, Algorithms, and Implementation (MIT Press, Boston, Massachusetts, 2005).Google Scholar
24.Sussmann, H. J., “An Introduction to the Coordinate-Free Maximum Principle,” In: Geometry of Feedback and Optimal Control (Jakubczyk, B. and Respondek, W., eds.) (Marcel Dekker, New York, 1997) pp. 463–557.Google Scholar
25.Jurdjevic, V., “Hamiltonian point of view of non-Euclidean geometry and elliptic functions,” Syst. Control Lett. 43, 25–41 (2001).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
26.Husemoller, D., Elliptic Curves (Springer, New York, 2004).Google Scholar
27.Olver, F. W. J., Lozier, D. W., Boisvert, R. F. and Clark, C. W., NIST Handbook of Mathematical Functions (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2010).Google Scholar
28.Meyer, K. R., “Jacobi elliptic functions from a dynamical systems point of view,” Am. Math. Mon. 108 (8), 729–737 (2001).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
29.Jurdjevic, V., “Non-Euclidean elastica,” Am. J. Math. 117 (1), 93–124 (1995).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
30.Abramowitz, M. and Stegun, I. A., Handbook of Mathematical Functions with Formulas, Graphs, and Mathematical Tables (Dover, Mineola, New York, 1972).Google Scholar
31.Mazer, E., Ahuactzin, J. M., Talbi, E. G. and Bessiere, P., “Robot Motion Planning with the Ariadne's Clew Algorithm,” Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent Autonomous Systems, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (1993).Google Scholar
32.Svetska, P. and Overmars, M. H., “Probabilistic Path Planning,” Technical Report UU-CS-1995-22, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands (1995).Google Scholar
33.Frazzoli, E., Dahleh, M. A. and Feron, E., “Maneuver-based motion planning for nonlinear systems with symmetries,” IEEE Trans. Robot. 21 (6), 1077–1091, (December 2005).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
34.Pivtoraiko, M. and Kelly, A., “Generating Near Minimal Spanning Control Sets for Constrained Motion Planning in Discrete State Spaces,” In: Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS) (2005), pp. 3231–3237.Google Scholar