Advertisement

Intelligent Service Robotics

, Volume 11, Issue 1, pp 53–60 | Cite as

Informed RRT* with improved converging rate by adopting wrapping procedure

  • Min-Cheol Kim
  • Jae-Bok SongEmail author
Original Research Paper

Abstract

Wrapping-based informed RRT*, proposed in this paper, combines a size-diminishing procedure, i.e., ‘wrapping procedure’ with informed RRT*, which samples random path nodes within a hyperellipsoid. The major and minor axes of the hyperellipsoid are determined by the initial and final configurations and current best solution’s path cost. Wrapping-based informed RRT* can advance from the first solution acquired by the planner to an improved, feasible solution which can drastically reduce the size of the hyperellipsoid. This leads to much quicker convergence to the optimal value of the path cost, resulting in the minimum action of the robot joints. The algorithm was tested in various environments with different numbers of joint variables and showed much better performance than the existing planners. Furthermore, the wrapping procedure proved to be a comparably insignificant computational burden regardless of the number of dimensions of the configuration space.

Keywords

Motion and path planning Path-based refiner Sampling-based motion planning Optimal motion planning 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by the MOTIE under the Industrial Foundation Technology Development Program supervised by the KEIT (No. 10084589).

Supplementary material

11370_2017_242_MOESM1_ESM.txt (0 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (txt 0 KB)
11370_2017_242_MOESM2_ESM.txt (0 kb)
Supplementary material 2 (txt 0 KB)

Supplementary material 3 (wmv 7299 KB)

Supplementary material 4 (wmv 5650 KB)

Supplementary material 5 (wmv 6431 KB)

Supplementary material 6 (wmv 2439 KB)

References

  1. 1.
    Faverjon B, Tournassoud P (1987) A local based approach for path planning of manipulators with a high number of degrees of freedom. In: IEEE international conference on robotics and automation, pp 1152–1159Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Schwartz JT, Sharir M (1983) On the “Piano movers” problem. II. General techniques for computing topological properties of real algebraic manifolds. Adv Appl Math 4(3):298–351MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gammell JD, Srinivasa SS, Barfoot TD (2015) Batch informed trees (BIT*): sampling-based optimal planning via the heuristically guided search of implicit random geometric graphs. In: IEEE proceedings of the international conference on robotics and automation 2015, pp 3067–3074Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lozano-Perez T (1983) Spatial planning: a configuration space approach. IEEE Trans Comput C–32(2):108–120MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Tolani D, Goswami A, Badler NI (2000) Real-time inverse kinematics techniques for anthropomorphic limbs. Graph Models 2000 62(5):353–388CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rickert M, Brock O, Knoll A (2008) Balancing exploration and exploitation in motion planning. In: IEEE proceedings of the international conference on robotics and automation 2008, pp 2812–2817Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kavraki LE, Svestka P, Latombe JC (1996) Probabilistic roadmaps for path planning in high-dimensional configuration spaces. IEEE Trans Robot Autom 1996 12(4):566–580CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lozano-Perez T (1987) A simple motion-planning algorithm for general robot manipulators. IEEE J Robot Autom 1987 3(3):224–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Janson L, Schmerling E, Clark A, Pavone M (2015) Fast marching tree: a fast marching sampling-based method for optimal motion planning in many dimensions. Int J Robot Res 34(7):883–921CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Richter C, Bry A, Roy N (2016) Polynomial trajectory planning for aggressive quadrotor flight in dense indoor environments. In: The 16th international symposium on robotics research, vol 14, pp 649–666Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kuffner JJ, Lavalle SM (2000) RRT-connect: an efficient approach to single-query path planning. In: IEEE proceedings of the international conference on robotics and automation 2000, vol 2, pp 995–1001Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Connell D, La HM (2017) Dynamic path planning and replanning for mobile robots using RRT. arXiv:1704.04585
  13. 13.
    Khan A et al (2017) Online complete coverage path planning using two-way proximity search. Intel Serv Robot 10(3):229–240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Noreen I, Khan A, Habib Z (2016) A comparison of RRT, RRT* and RRT*—smart path planning algorithms. Int J Comput Sci Netw Secur (IJCSNS) 16(10):20–27Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Khan A, Noreen I, Habib Z (2017) On complete coverage path planning algorithms for non-holonomic mobile robots: survey and challenges. J Inf Sci Eng 33(1):101–121MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Karaman S, Frazzoli E (2011) Sampling-based algorithms for optimal motion planning. Int J Robot Res 2011 30(7):846–894CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Yershova A, Jaillet L, Simeon T (2005) Dynamic-domain RRTs: efficient exploration by controlling the sampling domain. In: IEEE proceedings of the international conference on robotics and automation 2005, pp 3856–3861Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Solovey K, Salzman O, Halperin D (2016) Finding a needle in an exponential haystack; discrete RRT for exploration of implicit roadmaps in multi-robot motion planning. Int J Robot Res 35:501–513CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gammell JD, Srinivasa SS, Barfoot TD (2014) Informed RRT*: optimal incremental path planning focused through an admissible ellipsoidal heuristic. In: IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems, pp 2997–3004Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Islam F, Nasir J, Malik U, Ayaz Y (2012) RRT*-smart: rapid convergence implementation of RRT* towards optimal solution. In: IEEE international conference on mechatronics and automation 2012, pp 1651–1656Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Geraerts R, Overmars MH (2007) Creating high-quality paths for motion planning. Int J Robot Res 26(8):845–863CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Perez A, Karaman S, Shkolnik A, Frazzoli E, Teller S, Walter MR (2011) Asymptotically-optimal path planning for manipulation using incremental sampling-based algorithms. In: IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems, pp 4307–4313Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Mechanical EngineeringKorea UniversitySeoulKorea

Personalised recommendations