Advertisement

Mobile Robot Motion Framework Based on Enhanced Robust Panel Method

  • Jasmin VelagićEmail author
  • Lamija Vuković
  • Belma Ibrahimović
Article
  • 3 Downloads

Abstract

This paper proposes a framework for the mobile robot motion in partially unknown static and dynamic environments. Its main part is a path planner which is based on the enhanced robust panel method (ERPM). This proposed method improves an existing panel method in order to be employed for moving obstacles represented as open polygonal chains. The robustness of the proposed method is provided due to the automatic adjustment of the potential field parameters. Therefore, the proposed path-planning strategy incorporates relevant obstacle pruning and activation window algorithms to speed up the overall navigation process. Furthermore, the modified Histogramic-In-Motion-Map (MHIMM) method is proposed to continuously update a grid-based map of the environment. The path planning and robot motion performance evaluation with respect to the sensor noise and different environments is done using various metrics. The effectiveness and robustness of the proposed motion framework are demonstrated through numerous realistic scenarios within ROS environment with Pioneer 3DX mobile robot.

Keywords

Dynamic environment ERPM MHIMM map building path planning robot motion framework 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

References

  1. [1]
    S. Tzafestas, Introduction to Mobile Robot Control, Elsevier Inc., London, 2014.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    S. Bouraine, T. Fraichard, and H. Salhi, “Provably safe navigation for mobile robots with limited field-of-views in dynamic environments,” Autonomous Robots, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 267–283, 2012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    M. Boubezoula, A. Hassam, and O. Boutalbi, “Robust-flatness controller design for a differentially driven wheeled mobile robot,” International Journal of Control, Automation and Systems, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 1895–1904, 2018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    J. A. Mora, P. Beardsley, and R. Siegwart, “Cooperative collision avoidance for nonholonomic robots,” IEEE Transactions on Robotics, vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 404–420, 2018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    J. Y. Jhang, C. J. Lin, C. T. Lin, and K. Y. Young, “Navigation control of mobile robots using an interval type-2 fuzzy controller based on dynamic-group particle swarm optimization,” International Journal of Control, Automation and Systems, vol. 16, no. 5, pp. 2446–2457, 2018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    J. Han and Y. Seo, “Mobile robot path planning with surrounding point set and path improvement,” Applied Soft Computing, vol. 57, pp. 35–47, 2017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    J. Bamaquand, B. Langlois, and J.-C. Latombe, “Robot motion planning with many degrees of freedom and dynamic constraints,” International Journal of Robotic Research, vol. 10, no. 6, pp. 628–649, 1991.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    J. P. van den Berg and M. H. Overmars, “Roadmap-based motion planning in dynamic environments,” IEEE Transactions on Robotics, vol. 21, no. 5, pp. 885–897, 2005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    T. T. Mac, C. Copot, D. T. Tran, and R. De Keyser, “Heuristic approaches in robot path planning: A survey,” Robotics and Autonomous Systems, vol. 86, pp. 13–28, 2016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    O. Khatib, “Real-time obstacle avoidance for manipulators and mobile robots,” International Journal of Robotics Research, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 90–98, March 1986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    J. Kim and P. K. Khosla, “Real-time obstacle avoidance using harmonic potential functions,” IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation, vol. 3, pp. 338–349, 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    A. A. Masoud, “A harmonic potential field approach for joint planning and control of a rigid, separable nonholonomic, mobile robot,” Robotics and Autonomous Systems, vol. 61, no. 6, pp. 593–615, 2013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    F. Fahimi, Autonomous Robots: Modeling, Path Planning and Control, Springer, New York, 2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. [14]
    R. Daily and D. M. Bevly, “Harmonic potential field path planning for high speed vehicles,” Proc. of the American Control Conference, pp. 4609–4614, 2008.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    S. Garrido, L. Moreno, D. Blanco, and M. Monar, “Robotic motion using harmonic functions and finite elements,” Journal of Intelligent and Robotic Systems, vol. 59, no. 1, pp. 57–73, 2010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. [16]
    J. Borenstein and Y. Koren, “Histogramic in-motion mapping for mobile robot obstacle avoidance,” IEEE Journal of Robotics and Automation, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 535–539, 1991.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. [17]
    J. Velagic, B. Lacevic, and B. Perunicic, “A 3-level autonomous mobile robot navigation system designed by using reasoning/search approaches,” Robotics and Autonomous Systems, vol. 54, no. 12, pp. 989–1004, 2006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. [18]
    J. Velagic, B Lacevic, and N. Osmic, “Efficient path planning algorithm for mobile robot navigation with a local minima problem solving,” Proc. of the IEEE Conference on Industrial Technology, pp. 2325–2330, 2006.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    B. Lacevic and J. Velagic, “Evolutionary design of fuzzy logic based position controller for mobile robot,” Journal of Intelligent and Robotic Systems, vol. 63, no. 3–4, pp. 595–614, 2011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. [20]
    B. Ibrahimovic and J. Velagic, “Modified Robust Panel Method for Mobile Robot Path Planning in Partially Unknown Static and Dynamic Environments,” Proc. of the IEEE Conference on Control and Fault-Tolerant Systems, pp. 51–58, 2016.Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    A. Chakravarthy and D. Ghose, “Obstacle avoidance in a dynamic environment: A collision cone approach,” IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics — Part A: Systems and Humans, vol. 28, no. 5, pp. 562–574, 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. [22]
    I. Rano and J. Minguez, “Steps towards the automatic evaluation of robot obstacle avoidance algorithms,” Proc. of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, pp. 1–6, 2006.Google Scholar
  23. [23]
    D. Calisi and D. Nardi, “Performance evaluation of puremotion tasks for mobile robots with respect to world models,” Autonomous Robots, vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 465–481, 2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. [24]
    K. Tomomi, O. Jun, K. Rie, M. Takahisa, A. Tamio, U. Tsuyoshi, and N. Tsuyoshi, “Path planning for a mobile robot considering maximum curvature, maximum curvature derivative, and curvature continuity,” Transactions of JSME, vol. 688, no. 68, pp. 3269–3276, 2003.Google Scholar
  25. [25]
    U. Ozguner, C. Stiller, and K. Redmill, “Systems for safety and autonomous behavior in cars,” Proc. of the IEEE, vol. 95, no. 2, pp. 397–412, 2007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. [26]
    S. Farzan and G.N. DeSouza, “Path planning in dynamic environments using time-warped grids and a parallel implementation,” unpublished, 2019.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© ICROS, KIEE and Springer 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jasmin Velagić
    • 1
    Email author
  • Lamija Vuković
    • 1
  • Belma Ibrahimović
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculty of Electrical EngineeringUniversity of SarajevoSarajevoBosnia and Herzegovina

Personalised recommendations