Advertisement

Intelligent Service Robotics

, Volume 5, Issue 1, pp 1–18 | Cite as

Toward autonomous robotic containment booms: visual servoing for robust inter-vehicle docking of surface vehicles

  • Young-Ho Kim
  • Sang-Wook Lee
  • Hyun S. Yang
  • Dylan A. Shell
Special Issue

Abstract

Inter-vehicle docking is the problem of coordinating multiple robots to actively form and maintain physical contact. It is an important capability for autonomous surface vehicles (ASVs) and is an essential part of a wide class of missions. This article considers one such mission: the emergency response and environmental protection problem of containing a floating pollutant. We propose a solution in which multiple robots autonomously navigate so as to surround the surface matter. Before doing so, the robots dock with one another to secure specialized attachments designed to ensnare the contaminant. We describe the prototypical physical robot system developed to perform this task, and we detail the system architecture, sensing and computational hardware, control system, and visual processing pipeline. While employing multiple ASVs maximizes spatial reconfigurability, it depends on the inter-robot docking capabilities being particularly reliable. But achieving robust docking is a significant technical challenge because the water continually induces external disturbances on the control system. These disturbances are non-stationary and almost impossible to predict for unknown environments. Our system relies primarily on visual servoing within a control framework in which a variety of sensors are fused. Accurate disturbance measurements are obtained through traditional sensor modeling and filtering techniques. As the environment is a priori unknown, varies from trial to trial, and has proven difficult to model, we apply a model-free reinforcement learning algorithm, SARSA(λ), along with specialized initial conditions which ensure stable operation, and an exploration guidance approach that increases the speed of convergence. We adopt a two-loop control scheme for visual servoing to successfully make use of feature descriptors with various (and variable) computational times. We demonstrate this approach to the docking problem with autonomous ground vehicles and ASVs. The results from several situations are compared, showing that disturbance rejection coupled with SARSA(λ) is an effective approach.

Keywords

Autonomous surface vehicle Oil spill Docking Disturbance rejection Visual servoing Multirobot system 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Supplementary material

ESM 1 (AVI 22888 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Aull M (2009) Visual servoing for an autonomous rendezvous and capture system. Intell Serv Robot 2(3): 131–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    BBC (2007) South Korea fights huge oil spill. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7135896.stm. Accessed 10 Dec 2007
  3. 3.
    Benjamin M, Curcio J, Leonard JJ, Newman P (2006) Navigation of unmanned marine vehicles in accordance with the rules of the road. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA’06), Orlando, FL, May 2006, pp 3581–3587Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bertram V (2008) Unmanned surface vehicles—a Survey. In: Proceedings of skibsteknisk selskab meeting, Copenhagen, Denmark, March 2008Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bibuli M, Bruzzone G, Caccia M, Indiveri G, Zizzari AA (2008) Line following guidance control: application to the Charlie unmanned surface vehicle. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on intelligent robots and systems (IROS’08), Nice, France, September 2008, pp 3641–3646Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Caccia M, Bibuli M, Bono R, Bruzzone G (2008) Basic navigation, guidance and control of an unmanned surface vehicle. Auton Robots 25(4): 349–365CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Clauss GF, Kauffeldt A, Otten N (2009) AGaPaS—autonomous Galileo-supported rescue vessel for persons overboard. In: Proceedings of international conference on ocean, offshore and arctic engineering (OMAE’09), Honolulu, Hawaii, May 2009Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Comaniciu D, Meer P, Senior Member (2002) Mean shift: a robust approach toward feature space analysis. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell 24(5):603–619Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Curcio J, Leonard J, Patrikalakis N (2005) SCOUT—a low cost autonomous surface platform for research in cooperative autonomy. In: Proceedings of the MTS/IEEE oceans conference, Washington D.C., September 2005, pp 725–729Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Doerffer J (1992) Oil spill response in marine environment. Pergamon Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dunbabin M, Lang B, Wood B (2008) Vision-based docking using an autonomous surface vehicle. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA’08), Pasadena, CA, USA, May 2008, pp 26–32Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    El-Fakdi A, Carreras M (2008) Policy gradient based Reinforcement Learning for real autonomous underwater cable tracking. In: Proceedings of the international conference on intelligent robots and systems (IROS’08), Nice, France, September 2008, pp 3635–3640Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fahimi F (2007) Sliding-mode formation control for underactuated surface vessels. IEEE Trans Robot 23(3): 617–622CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Fang J, Wong K-FV (2001) Optimization of an oil boom arrangement. In: Proceedings of Biennial international conference on oil spills. Tampa, FL, March 2001Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Fang J, Wong K-FV (2006) An advanced VOF algorithm for oil boom design. Int J Model Simul 26(1): 36–44Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Farrel JA, Barth M (1998) The global positioning system and inertial navigation. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Fingas MF, Charles J (2000) The basics of oil spill cleanup, 2 edn. CRC Press, Boca RatonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Fischler MA, Bolles RC (1981) Random sample consensus: a paradigm for model fitting with applications to image analysis and automated cartography. Commun ACM 24(6): 381–395CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gaskett C, Wettergreen D, Zelinsky A (1999) Reinforcement Learning applied to the control of an Autonomous Underwater Vehicle. In: Proceedings of the Australian conference on robotics and automation (AUCRA99), Brisbane, Australia, March 1999, pp 125–131Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Giesbrecht JL, Goi HK, Barfoot TD, Francis BA (2009) A vision-based robotic follower vehicle. Proc Int Soc Opt Photonics (SPIE) 7332: 733210-1–733210-12Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Grewal MS, Andrews AP (2001) Kalman filtering: theory and practice using MATLAB. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Grewal MS, Henderson VD, Miyasako RS (1991) Application of Kalman filtering to the calibration and alignment of inertial navigation systems. IEEE Trans Autom Control 36(1): 4–13CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Grier P (2010) Containment boom effort comes up short in BP oil spill. The Christian Science Monitor, BostonGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hutchinson S, Hage GD, Corke PI (1996) A tutorial on visual servo control. IEEE Trans Robot Autom 12(5): 651–670CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Joshi N, Kang SB, Zitnick CL, Szeliski R (2010) Image deblurring using inertial measurement sensors. ACM Trans Graph 29(4): 1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kakalis NMP, Ventikos Y (2008) Robotic swarm concept for efficient oil spill confrontation. J Hazard Mater 154(1–3): 880–887CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kim M, Chong NY, Yu W (2009) Robust DOA estimation and target docking for mobile robots. Intell Serv Robot 2(1): 41–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Lowe DG (2004) Distinctive image features from scale-invariant keypoints. Int J Comput Vis 60(2): 91–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Martinez-Marin T, Duckett T (2005) Fast Reinforcement Learning for vision-guided mobile robots. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA’05), Barcelona, Spain, April 2005, pp 4170–4175Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Martins A, Almeida JM, Ferreira H, Silva H, Dias N, Dias A, Almeida C, Silva EP (2007) Autonomous surface vehicle docking manoeuvre with visual information. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA’07), Roma, Italy, April 2007, pp 4994–4999Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Murarka A, Kuhlmann G, Gulati S, Sridharan M, Flesher C, Stone WC (2009) Vision-based frozen surface egress: a docking algorithm for the ENDURANCE AUV. In: Proceedings of the international symposium on unmanned untethered submersible technology (UUST), New Hampshire, USA, August 2009Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Murphy RR, Steimle E, Hall M, Lindemuth M, Trejo D, Hurlebaus S, Medina-Cetina Z, Slocum D (2011) Robot-assisted bridge inspection. J Intelligent Robot Syst 64(1): 77–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    NOAA (2010) Deepwater horizon MC252 gulf incident oil budget. http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2010/PDFs/DeepwaterHorizonOilBudget20100801.pdf. Accessed 2 Aug 2010
  34. 34.
    Ondřej C, Jiri M (2005) Matching with PROSAC—progressive sample consensus. In: Proceedings of the IEEE computer society conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, San Diego,USA, July 2005, pp 220–226Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Park J-Y, Jun B-H, Lee P-M, Oh J (2009) Experiments on vision guided docking of an autonomous underwater vehicle using one camera. Ocean Eng 36(1): 48–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Parker LE (2008) Multiple mobile robot systems. In: Siciliano B, Khatib O (eds) Handbook of robotics, chapter 40. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Pereira A, Das J, Sukhatme GS (2008) An experimental study of station keeping on an underactuated ASV. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on intelligent robots and systems (IROS’08), Nice, France, September 2008, pp 3164–3171Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Rosten E, Drummond T (2006) Machine learning for high-speed corner detection. In: Proceedings of the European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV’06), Graz,Austria, May 2006, pp 430–443Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Sullivan G (2010) Miles of oil containment boom sit in warehouse, waiting for BP or U.S. to Use. Pajamas Media, June, 8 2010Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Sutton RS, Barto AG (1998) Reinforcement learning: an introduction. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Wang J, Gu W, Zhu J (2009) Design of an autonomous surface vehicle used for marine environment monitoring. In: Proceedings of the international conference on advanced computer control, Los Alamitos, CA, USA, 2009, pp 405–0409Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Welch G, Bishop G (2006) An introduction to the Kalman filter. Technical Report TR 95-041, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, July 2006Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Young-Ho Kim
    • 1
  • Sang-Wook Lee
    • 2
  • Hyun S. Yang
    • 3
  • Dylan A. Shell
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and EngineeringTexas A&M UniversityCollege StationUSA
  2. 2.Robotics ProgramKorea Advanced Institute of Science and TechnologyDaejeonSouth Korea
  3. 3.Department of Computer ScienceKorea Advanced Institute of Science and TechnologyDaejeonSouth Korea

Personalised recommendations