Autonomous Robots

, Volume 33, Issue 4, pp 445–465 | Cite as

Distributed orientation agreement in a group of robots

  • Iñaki NavarroEmail author
  • Fernando Matía


In this article, a method for the agreement of a set of robots on a common reference orientation based on a distributed consensus algorithm is described. It only needs that robots detect the relative positions of their neighbors and communicate with them. Two different consensus algorithms based on the exchange of information are proposed, tested and analyzed. Systematic experiments were carried out in simulation and with real robots in order to test the method. Experimental results show that the robots are able to agree on the reference orientation under certain conditions. Scalability with an increasing number of robots was tested successfully in simulation with up to 49 robots. Experiments with real robots succeeded proving that the proposed method works in reality.


Multi-robot Consensus Decentralized control Distributed systems 


  1. Alanyali, M., Venkatesh, S., Savas, O., & Aeron, S. (2004). Distributed Bayesian hypothesis testing in sensor networks. In Proceedings of the 2004 American control conference (Vol. 6, pp. 5369–5374). Google Scholar
  2. Bauso, D., Giarre, L., & Pesenti, R. (2003). Distributed consensus protocols for coordinating buyers. In Proceedings of the 42nd IEEE conference on decision and control, Maui, Hawaii (Vol. 1, pp. 588–592). Google Scholar
  3. Borenstein, J., Everett, R., & Feng, L. (1996). Where am I? Systems and methods for mobile robot positioning. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Google Scholar
  4. Carling, C., Svenson, P., Mårtenson, C., & Carlsen, H. (2003). A flock-based model for ad hoc communication networks. In Eight international command and control research and technology symposium, Washington, DC, USA. Google Scholar
  5. Çelikkanat, H., Turgut, A. E., & Şahin, E. (2009). Heidelberg, chap guiding a robot flock via informed robots. In Distributed autonomous robotic systems 8 (pp. 215–225). Berlin: Springer. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chuang, Y. L., Huang, Y., D’Orsogna, M., & Bertozzi, A. (2007). Multi-vehicle flocking: scalability of cooperative control algorithms using pairwise potentials. In 2007 IEEE international conference on robotics and automation. Google Scholar
  7. Denantes, P. (2007). Performance of averaging algorithms in time-varying networks. Master’s thesis, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne. Google Scholar
  8. Flocchini, P., Prencipe, G., Santoro, N., & Widmayer, P. (2008). Arbitrary pattern formation by asynchronous, anonymous, oblivious robots. Theoretical Computer Science, 407, 412–447. MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gutiérrez, A., Campo, A., Dorigo, M., Donate, J., Monasterio-Huelin, F., & Magdalena, L. (2009). Open e-puck range and bearing miniaturized board for local communication in swarm robotics. In Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on robotics and automation, Piscataway, NJ (pp. 3111–3116). New York: IEEE Press. Google Scholar
  10. Jadbabaie, A., Lin, J., & Morse, A. S. (2003). Coordination of groups of mobile autonomous agents using nearest neighbor rules. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 48(6), 988–1001. MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Lee, G., & Chong, N. Y. (2006). Decentralized formation control for a team of anonymous mobile robots. In The 6th Asian control, Bali, Indonesia. Google Scholar
  12. Lochmatter, T., Roduit, P., Cianci, C., Correll, N., Jacot, J., & Martinoli, A. (2008). SwisTrack—a flexible open source tracking software for multi-agent systems. In IEEE/RSJ 2008 international conference on intelligent robots and systems (IROS 2008), IEEE (pp. 4004–4010). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Martinson, E., & Payton, D. (2005). Lattice formation in mobile autonomous sensor arrays. In E. Şahin & W. Spears (Eds.), Swarm robotics workshop: state-of-the-art survey (pp. 98–111). Berlin: Springer. Google Scholar
  14. Mehyar, M., Spanos, D., Pongsajapan, J., Low, S., & Murray, R. (2005). Distributed averaging on asynchronous communication networks. In 44th IEEE conference on decision and control, 2005 and 2005 European control conference. CDC-ECC ’05 (pp. 7446–7451). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Mills, D. L. (1992). Network time protocol (version 3) specification, implementation and analysis (rfc 1305) (Tech. rep.). University of Delaware. Google Scholar
  16. Navarro, I., & Matía, F. (2009). A proposal of a set of metrics for collective movement of robots. In Proceedings of workshop on good experimental methodology in robotics, robotics science and systems. Google Scholar
  17. Navarro, I., & Matía, F. (2011). A framework for collective movement of mobile robots based on distributed decisions. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 59(10), 685–697. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Navarro, I., Gutiérrez, A., Matía, F., & Monasterio-Huelin, F. (2008). An approach to flocking of robots using minimal local sensing and common orientation. In E. Corchado, A. Abraham & W. Pedrycz (Eds.), Lecture notes in artificial intelligence (LNAI): Vol. 5271. Hybrid artificial intelligent systems: 3th International Workshop, HAIS 2008 (pp. 616–624). Berlin: Springer. Google Scholar
  19. Navarro, I., Pugh, J., Martinoli, A., & Matia, F. (2009). A distributed scalable approach to formation control in multi-robot systems. In Distributed autonomous robotic systems 8 (pp. 203–214). Berlin: Springer. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ojeda, L., & Borenstein, J. (2000). Experimental results with the kvh c-100 fluxgate compass in mobile robots. In Proceedings of the IASTED international conference robotics and applications 2000, Honolulu, Hawaii, USA. Google Scholar
  21. Olfati-Saber, R. (2006). Flocking for multi-agent dynamic systems: algorithms and theory. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 51, 401–420. MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Olfati-Saber, R., & Murray, R. M. (2003). Consensus protocols for networks of dynamic agents. In American control conference (Vol. 2, pp. 951–956). Google Scholar
  23. Pugh, J., Raemy, X., Favre, C., Falconi, R., & Martinoli, A. (2009). A fast on-board relative positioning module for multi-robot systems. In IEEE/ASME transactions on mechatronics, focused section on mechatronics multi robot systems. Google Scholar
  24. Ren, W., Beard, R. W., & Atkins, E. M. (2007). Information consensus in multivehicle cooperative control. IEEE Control Systems Magazine, 27, 71–82. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Reynolds, C. W. (1987). Flocks, herds, and schools: a distributed behavioral model. Computer Graphics, 21(4), 25–34. MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Talebi, M. S., Kefayati, M., Khalaj, B. H., & Rabiee, H. R. (2006). Adaptive consensus averaging for information fusion over sensor network. In The third IEEE international conference on mobile ad-hoc and sensor systems (MASS’06). Google Scholar
  27. Tanner, H., Jadbabaie, A., & Pappas, G. (2003a). Stable flocking of mobile agents, part i: fixed topology. In Proceedings. 42nd IEEE conference on decision and control (Vol. 2, pp. 2010–2015). Google Scholar
  28. Tanner, H., Jadbabaie, A., & Pappas, G. (2003b). Stable flocking of mobile agents, part ii: dynamic topology. In Proceedings. 42nd IEEE conference on decision and control (Vol. 2, pp. 2010–2015). Google Scholar
  29. Turgut, A. E., Çelikkanat, H., Gökçe, F., & Şahin, E. (2008). Self-organized flocking in mobile robot swarms. Swarm Intelligence, 2(2–4), 97–120. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Xiao, L., & Boyd, S. (2003). Fast linear iterations for distributed averaging. In 42nd IEEE conference on in decision and control, Hawaii (pp. 4997–5002). Google Scholar
  31. Xiao, L., Boyd, S., & Lall, S. (2005). A scheme for robust distributed sensor fusion based on average consensus. In International conference on information processing in sensor networks, Los Angeles (pp. 63–70). Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.ETSI IndustrialesUniversidad Politécnica de MadridMadridSpain

Personalised recommendations