Autonomous Robots

, Volume 41, Issue 8, pp 1609–1628 | Cite as

Simultaneous area partitioning and allocation for complete coverage by multiple autonomous industrial robots

  • Mahdi HassanEmail author
  • Dikai Liu


For tasks that require complete coverage of surfaces by multiple autonomous industrial robots, it is important that the robots collaborate to appropriately partition and allocate the surface areas amongst themselves such that the robot team’s objectives are optimized. An approach to this problem is presented, which takes into account unstructured and complex 3D environments, and robots with different capabilities. The proposed area partitioning and allocation approach utilizes Voronoi partitioning to partition objects’ surfaces, and multi-objective optimization to allocate the partitioned areas to the robots whilst optimizing robot team’s objectives. In addition to minimizing the overall completion time and achieving complete coverage, which are objectives particularly useful for applications such as surface cleaning, manipulability measure and joint’s torque are also optimized so as to help autonomous industrial robots to operate better in applications such as spray painting and grit-blasting. The approach is validated using six case studies that consist of comparative studies, complex simulated scenarios as well as real scenarios using data obtained from real objects and applications.


Multi-robot collaboration Multiple autonomous industrial robots Area partitioning and allocation Complete coverage 



This research is supported by SABRE Autonomous Solutions Pty Ltd and the Centre for Autonomous Systems (CAS) at the University of Technology Sydney (UTS), Australia. Authors thank Prof. Gamini Dissanayake, Assoc. Prof. Shoudong Huang, Dr. Gavin Paul, Dr. Andrew To, Mr. Gregory Peters, and Mr. Teng Zhang for their valuable suggestions and discussions.

Supplementary material

10514_2017_9631_MOESM1_ESM.wmv (23.5 mb)
Supplementary material 1 (wmv 24079 KB)


  1. Batsaikhan, D., Janchiv, A., & Lee, S.-G. (2013). Sensor-based incremental boustrophedon decomposition for coverage path planning of a mobile robot. In S. Lee, H. Cho, K.-J. Yoon, & J. Lee (Eds.), Intelligent autonomous systems, advances in intelligent systems and computing (Vol. 193, pp. 621–628). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  2. Carlone, L., Kaouk Ng, M., Du, J., Bona, B., & Indri, M. (2011). Simultaneous localization and mapping using rao-blackwellized particle filters in multi robot systems. Journal of Intelligent and Robotic Systems, 63(2), 283–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Danner, T., & Kavraki, L. E. (2000). Randomized planning for short inspection paths. In IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, vol 2, (pp. 971–976).Google Scholar
  4. Deb, K., Agrawal, S., Pratap, A., & Meyarivan, T. (2000). A fast elitist non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm for multi-objective optimization: NSGA-II. In M. Schoenauer, K. Deb, G. Rudolph, X. Yao, E. Lutton, J. Merelo, & H.-P. Schwefel (Eds.), Parallel problem solving from nature PPSN VI (vol. 1917, pp. 849–858)., Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  5. Englot, B., & Hover, F. S. (2012). Sampling-based coverage path planning for inspection of complex structures. In Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling (ICAPS). Atibaia, Sao Paulo Brazil.
  6. Englot, B., & Hover, F. S. (2013). Three-dimensional coverage planning for an underwater inspection robot. The International Journal of Robotics Research, 32(9–10), 1048–1073.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fazli, P., Davoodi, A., & Mackworth, A. (2013). Multi-robot repeated area coverage. Autonomous Robots, 34(4), 251–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Galceran, E., & Carreras, M. (2013). A survey on coverage path planning for robotics. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 61(12), 1258–1276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Guanghui, L., Yamashita, A., Asama, H., & Tamura, Y. (2012). An efficient improved artificial potential field based regression search method for robot path planning. In 2012 International Conference on Mechatronics and Automation (ICMA), (pp. 1227–1232).Google Scholar
  10. Gunady, M. K., Gomaa, W., & Takeuchi, I. (2014). Aggregate reinforcement learning for multi-agent territory division: The hide-and-seek game. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 34, 122–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Han, J., Shao, L., Xu, D., & Shotton, J. (2013). Enhanced computer vision with microsoft kinect sensor: A review. IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics, 43(5), 1318–1334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hassan, M., Liu, D., Huang, S., & Dissanayake, G. (2014). Task oriented area partitioning and allocation for optimal operation of multiple industrial robots in unstructured environments. In 13th International Conference on Control, Automation, Robotics and Vision (ICARCV), (pp. 1184–1189).Google Scholar
  13. Hassan, M., Liu, D., Paul, G., & Huang, S. (2015). An approach to base placement for effective collaboration of multiple autonomous industrial robots. In IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), (pp. 3286–3291).Google Scholar
  14. Hassan, M., Liu, D., & Paul, G. (2016 - in press) Modeling and stochastic optimization of complete coverage under uncertainties in multi-robot base placements. In IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS).Google Scholar
  15. Janchiv, A., Batsaikhan, D., Kim, B., Lee, W., & Lee, S.-G. (2013). Time-efficient and complete coverage path planning based on flow networks for multi-robots. International Journal of Control, Automation and Systems, 11(2), 369–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kapanoglu, M., Alikalfa, M., Ozkan, M., Yazc, A., & Parlaktuna, O. (2012). A pattern-based genetic algorithm for multi-robot coverage path planning minimizing completion time. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 23(4), 1035–1045.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Latombe, J.-C. (2012). Robot motion planning (Vol. 124). London: Springer.Google Scholar
  18. Maza, I., & Ollero, A. (2007). Multiple UAV cooperative searching operation using polygon area decomposition and efficient coverage algorithms. In R. Alami, R. Chatila, & H. Asama (Eds.), Distributed autonomous robotic systems 6 (pp. 221–230). Japan: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Niku, S. B. (2011). Introduction to robotics: Analysis, control, applications (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
  20. Okabe, A., Boots, B., Sugihara, K., Chiu, S. N., & Kendall, D. G. (2008). Spatial tessellations: Concepts and applications of Voronoi diagrams (Vol. 501). London: Wiley.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. Patel, S., & Sobh, T. (2015). Manipulator performance measures—a comprehensive literature survey. Journal of Intelligent and Robotic Systems, 77(3–4), 547–570.Google Scholar
  22. Paul, G., Webb, S., Liu, D., & Dissanayake, G. (2011). Autonomous robot manipulator-based exploration and mapping system for bridge maintenance. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 59(78), 543–554.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Paul, G., Kwok, N., & Liu, D. (2013). A novel surface segmentation approach for robotic manipulator-based maintenance operation planning. Automation in Construction, 29, 136–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Peters, S. (2013). Quadtree- and octree-based approach for point data selection in 2D or 3D. Annals of GIS, 19(1), 37–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ranjbar-Sahraei, B., Weiss, G., & Nakisaee, A. (2012). A multi-robot coverage approach based on stigmergic communication. In I. Timm & C. Guttmann (Eds.), Multiagent system technologies (Vol. 7598, pp. 126–138)., Lecture Notes in Computer Science Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  26. Ren, Z., Yuan, J., & Liu, W. (2013). Minimum near-convex shape decomposition. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 35(10), 2546–2552.Google Scholar
  27. Xu, J., Liu, D., & Fang, G. (2007). An efficient method for collision detection and distance queries in a robotic bridge maintenance system. In T.-J. Tarn, S.-B. Chen, & C. Zhou (Eds.), Robotic welding, intelligence and automation (vol. 362, pp. 71–82)., Lecture notes in control and information sciences. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  28. Yoshikawa, T. (1985). Manipulability of robotic mechanisms. The International Journal of Robotics Research, 4(2), 3–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Zheng, X., Koenig, S., Kempe, D., & Jain, S. (2010). Multirobot forest coverage for weighted and unweighted terrain. IEEE Transactions on Robotics, 26(6), 1018–1031.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Zhou, A., Qu, B.-Y., Li, H., Zhao, S.-Z., Suganthan, P. N., & Zhang, Q. (2011). Multiobjective evolutionary algorithms: A survey of the state of the art. Swarm and Evolutionary Computation, 1(1), 32–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre for Autonomous Systems (CAS)University of Technology Sydney (UTS)SydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations