Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A review of rule-based collision avoidance technology for autonomous UAV

  • Review
  • Published:
Science China Technological Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The rapid increase in the number of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) poses a threat to the safety of personnel, ground facilities, and aircraft. Therefore, as the basis of UAV safety protection, requirements on collision avoidance technology are getting higher in the mean time. Although plenty of research on UAV collision avoidance systems and methods exists, there is still a lack of integrated view of the UAV safety in the current civil airspace. The reason behind this is that the collision avoidance is always treated as a simple and basic behavior of autonomous robots, wherein a UAV is considered not so much different from other unmanned moving vehicles except its dynamic model. Regulations and rules that are specific to the UAVs under the background of airspace safety are not emphasized and put into consideration in the system and method design. This review paper serves as a guide for developing the UAV collision avoidance technology by summarizing the existing regulations and rules related to UAV collision avoidance, discussing the mathematical formulation of the rule-based collision avoidance methods, and testing and benchmarking those methods.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Adade R, Aibinu A M, Ekumah B, et al. Unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) applications in coastal zone management—a review. Environ Monit Assess, 2021, 193: 154

    Google Scholar 

  2. Chen H, Lan Y, K Fritz B, et al. Review of agricultural spraying technologies for plant protection using unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV). Int J Agric Biol Eng, 2021, 14: 38–49

    Google Scholar 

  3. Xie C, Yang C. A review on plant high-throughput phenotyping traits using UAV-based sensors. Comput Electron Agr, 2020, 178: 105731

    Google Scholar 

  4. Yu Y P, Liu J C, Wei C. Hawk and pigeon’s intelligence for UAV swarm dynamic combat game via competitive learning pigeon-inspired optimization. Sci China Tech Sci, 2022, 65: 1072–1086

    Google Scholar 

  5. Hu J W, Wang M, Zhao C H, et al. Formation control and collision avoidance for multi-UAV systems based on Voronoi partition. Sci China Tech Sci, 2020, 63: 65–72

    Google Scholar 

  6. Bai T T, Wang D B, Masood R J. Formation control of quad-rotor UAV via PIO. Sci China Tech Sci, 2022, 65: 432–439

    Google Scholar 

  7. Cook A, Blom H A P, Lillo F, et al. Applying complexity science to air traffic management. J Air Transp Manage, 2015, 42: 149–158

    Google Scholar 

  8. Talal M, Ramli K N, Zaidan A A, et al. Review on car-following sensor based and data-generation mapping for safety and traffic management and road map toward ITS. Vehicular Commun, 2020, 25: 100280

    Google Scholar 

  9. Davies L, Vagapov Y, Grout V, et al. Review of air traffic management systems for UAV integration into urban airspace. In: Proceedings of the International Workshop on Electric Drives: Improving Reliability of Electric Drives. Moscow, 2021

  10. Rumba R, Nikitenko A. The wild west of drones: A review on autonomous-UAV traffic-management. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Unmanned Aircraft Systems, 2020. 1317–1322

  11. Hu J, Zheng B, Wang C, et al. A survey on multi-sensor fusion based obstacle detection for intelligent ground vehicles in off-road environments. Front Inform Technol Electron Eng, 2020, 21: 675–692

    Google Scholar 

  12. Zhu J H. A survey of advanced flight control theory and application. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Multiconference on Computational Engineering in Systems Applications. IEEE, 2006. 1: 655–658

  13. Fraga-Lamas P, Ramos L, Mondéjar-Guerra V, et al. A review on IoT deep learning UAV systems for autonomous obstacle detection and collision avoidance. Remote Sens, 2019, 11: 2144

    Google Scholar 

  14. Vagale A, Oucheikh R, Bye R T, et al. Path planning and collision avoidance for autonomous surface vehicles I: A review. J Mar Sci Technol, 2021, 26: 1292–1306

    Google Scholar 

  15. Zhao Z, Zhou L, Zhu Q, et al. A review of essential technologies for collision avoidance assistance systems. Adv Mech Eng, 2017, 9, doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/1687814017725246

  16. Gonzalez D, Perez J, Milanes V, et al. A review of motion planning techniques for automated vehicles. IEEE Trans Intell Transp Syst, 2016, 17: 1135–1145

    Google Scholar 

  17. Huang S, Teo R S H, Tan K K. Collision avoidance of multi unmanned aerial vehicles: A review. Annu Rev Control, 2019, 48: 147–164

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  18. Kavraki L E, Svestka P, Latombe J C, et al. Probabilistic roadmaps for path planning in high-dimensional configuration spaces. IEEE Trans Robot Automat, 1996, 12: 566–580

    Google Scholar 

  19. Jr J J K, LaValle S M. Rrt-connect: An efficient approach to single-query path planning. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. IEEE, 2000. 995–1001

  20. Yue Y. An efficient implementation of shortest path algorithm based on Dijkstra algorithm. J Wuhan Tech Univ Surv Map, 1999, 24: 209–212

    Google Scholar 

  21. Konar A, Goswami I, Singh S J, et al. A deterministic improved q-learning for path planning of a mobile robot. Syst Man Cybern Syst, 2013, 43: 1141–1153

    Google Scholar 

  22. Lumelsky V, Stepanov A. Dynamic path planning for a mobile automaton with limited information on the environment. IEEE Trans Automat Control, 1986, 31: 1058–1063

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  23. Khatib O. Real-time obstacle avoidance for manipulators and mobile robots. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. IEEE, 1990. 500–505

  24. van den Berg J P, Lin M C, Manocha D. Reciprocal velocity obstacles for real-time multi-agent navigation. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. IEEE, 2008. 1928–1935

  25. Jaradat M A K, Al-Rousan M, Quadan L. Reinforcement based mobile robot navigation in dynamic environment. Robotics Comput-Integrated Manuf, 2011, 27: 135–149

    Google Scholar 

  26. Mitsikas T, Stefaneas P, Ouranos I. A rule-based approach for air traffic control in the vicinity of the airport. In: Proceedings of the THALES Workshop on Algebraic Modeling of Topological and Computational Structures and Applications, volume 219 of Springer Proceedings in Mathematics and Statistics. Athens, 2017. 423–438

  27. Mayne D Q. Model predictive control: Recent developments and future promise. Automatica, 2014, 50: 2967–2986

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  28. de Souza A M, Brennand C A, Yokoyama R S, et al. Traffic management systems: A classification, review, challenges, and future perspectives. Int J Distributed Sens Networks, 2017, 13: 155014771668361

    Google Scholar 

  29. Tang J. Review: Analysis and improvement of traffic alert and collision avoidance system. IEEE Access, 2017, 5: 21419–21429

    Google Scholar 

  30. Aggarwal S, Kumar N. Path planning techniques for unmanned aerial vehicles: A review, solutions, and challenges. Comput Commun, 2020, 149: 270–299

    Google Scholar 

  31. Mansikka H, Virtanen K, Harris D, et al. Fighter pilots’ heart rate, heart rate variation and performance during an instrument flight rules proficiency test. Appl Ergonomics, 2016, 56: 213–219

    Google Scholar 

  32. Goh J, Wiegmann D A. Visual flight rules flight into instrument meteorological conditions: An empirical investigation of the possible causes. Int J Aviation Psychol, 2001, 11: 359–379

    Google Scholar 

  33. Maybury M T. Knowledge Management at the MITRE Corporation. Bedford: MITRE Corporation, 2002

    Google Scholar 

  34. Lascara B, Lacher A, DeGarmo M, et al. Urban air mobility airspace integration concepts: Operational concepts and exploration approachs. Technical Report. MITRE Corporation, 2019

  35. Nguyen T. Dynamic delegated corridors and 4D required navigation performance for urban air mobility (UAM) airspace integration. J Aviat/Aerosp Edu Res, 2020, 29: 57–72

    Google Scholar 

  36. Zhou T, Hasheminasab S M, Ravi R, et al. LiDAR-aided interior orientation parameters refinement strategy for consumer-grade cameras onboard UAV remote sensing systems. Remote Sens, 2020, 12: 2268

    Google Scholar 

  37. Homola J, Prevot T, Mercer J, et al. UAS traffic management (UTM) simulation capabilities and laboratory environment. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/AIAA Digital Avionics Systems Conference. IEEE, 2016

  38. Homola J, Dao Q, Martin L, et al. Technical capability level 2 unmanned aircraft system traffic management (UTM) flight demonstration: Description and analysis. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/AIAA Digital Avionics Systems Conference. IEEE, 2017

  39. Homola J, Martin L, Cencetti M, et al. UAS traffic management (UTM) technical capability level 3 (TCL3) flight demonstration: Concept tests and results. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/AIAA Digital Avionics Systems Conference. IEEE, 2019

  40. Aweiss A, Homola J, Rios J, et al. Flight demonstration of unmanned aircraft system (UAS) traffic management (UTM) at technical capability level 3. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/AIAA Digital Avionics Systems Conference. IEEE, 2019. 1–7

  41. Raju P, Rios J, Jordan A. UTM—a complementary set of services to ATM. In: Proceedings of the Integrated Communications, Navigation, Surveillance Conference. Herndon, 2018

  42. Kotlinski M. UTM system operational implementation as a way for U-space deployment on basis of polish national law. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Unmanned Aircraft Systems. Athens, 2020. 1680–1687

  43. Lappas V, Zoumponos G, Kostopoulos V, et al. EuroDRONE, a european UTM testbed for U-space. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Unmanned Aircraft Systems. Athens, 2020. 1766–1774

  44. Lieb J, Peklar G. Evaluation of an unique communication interface system D2X for UAVs intercommunicating with air and ground UTM users. In: Proceedings of the Integrated Communications, Navigation and Surveillance Conference. Herndon, 2019. 1–9

  45. Lin C E, Shao P C. Development of hierarchical UAS traffic management (UTM) in Taiwan. J Phys-Conf Ser, 2020, 1509: 012012

    Google Scholar 

  46. Lin C E, Shao P C, Lin Y Y. System operation of regional UTM in Taiwan. Aerospace, 2020, 7: 65

    Google Scholar 

  47. Nakamura H, Harada K, Oura Y. UTM concept demonstrations in Fukushima; overview of demonstration and lesson learnt for operation of multiple UAS in the same airspace. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Unmanned Aircraft Systems. Dallas, 2018. 222–228

  48. Young R. A proposed approach to a 2019 UTM concept of operations. In: Proceedings of the Integrated Communications, Navigation and Surveillance Conference. Herndon, 2019. 1–13

  49. Matus F, Hedblom B. Addressing the low-altitude airspace integration challenge—USS or UTM core? In: Proceedings of the Integrated Communications, Navigation, Surveillance Conference, 2018

  50. Jiang T, Geller J, Ni D, et al. Unmanned Aircraft System traffic management: Concept of operation and system architecture. Int J Transp Sci Tech, 2016, 5: 123–135

    Google Scholar 

  51. Yadav A, Goel S, Lohani B, et al. A UAV traffic management system for India: Requirement and preliminary analysis. J Ind Soc Remote Sens, 2020, 49: 515–525

    Google Scholar 

  52. Guruji A K, Agarwal H, Parsediya D K. Time-efficient A* algorithm for robot path planning. Procedia Tech, 2016, 23: 144–149

    Google Scholar 

  53. Stentz A. Optimal and efficient path planning for partially-known environments. In: Proceedings of the Robotics and Automation, 1994. 3310–3317

  54. Lim D, Park J, Han D, et al. UAV path planning with derivative of the heuristic angle. Int J Aeronaut Space Sci, 2021, 22: 140–150

    Google Scholar 

  55. Zucker M, Kuffner J J, Branicky M S. Multipartite RRTs for rapid replanning in dynamic environments. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. IEEE, 2007. 1603–1609

  56. Karaman S, Walter M R, Perez A, et al. Anytime motion planning using the RRT*. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. IEEE, 2011. 1478–1483

  57. Qureshi A H, Ayaz Y. Intelligent bidirectional rapidly-exploring random trees for optimal motion planning in complex cluttered environments. Robotics Autonomous Syst, 2015, 68: 1–11

    Google Scholar 

  58. Tahir Z, Qureshi A H, Ayaz Y, et al. Potentially guided bidirectionalized RRT* for fast optimal path planning in cluttered environments. Robotics Autonomous Syst, 2018, 108: 13–27

    Google Scholar 

  59. Jing X J, Tan D, Wang Y. Behavior dynamics of collision-avoidance in motion planning of mobile robots. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems. IEEE, 2004. 2: 1624–1629

  60. van den Berg J, Guy S J, Lin M C, et al. Reciprocal n-body collision avoidance. In: Proceedings of the Robotics Research. New York: Springer, 2009. 3–19

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  61. van den Berg J P, Lin M C, Manocha D. Reciprocal velocity obstacles for real-time multi-agent navigation. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. IEEE, 2008. 1928–1935

  62. van den Berg J P, Snape J, Guy S J, et al. Reciprocal collision avoidance with acceleration-velocity obstacles. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. IEEE, 2011. 3475–3482

  63. Van Den Berg J, Guy S J, Lin M, et al. Optimal reciprocal collision avoidance for multi-agent navigation. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. IEEE, 2013. 203–216

  64. Raj J, Raghuwaiya K, Vanualailai J. Collision avoidance of 3D rectangular planes by multiple cooperating autonomous agents. J Adv Trans, 2020, doi: https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/4723687

  65. Dai J Y, Sun Y J, Ying J, et al. Research on cooperative obstacle avoidance control of UAV formation based on improved potential field method. In: Proceedings of the Chinese Control Conference, 2020. 4633–4638

  66. Jayaweera H M, Hanoun S. A dynamic artificial potential field (D-APF) UAV path planning technique for following ground moving targets. IEEE Access, 2020, 8: 192760

    Google Scholar 

  67. Wu E, Sun Y, Huang J, et al. Multi UAV cluster control method based on virtual core in improved artificial potential field. IEEE Access, 2020, 8: 131647

    Google Scholar 

  68. Lifen L, Ruoxin S, Shuandao L, et al. Path planning for UAVs based on improved artificial potential field method through changing the repulsive potential function. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Chinese Guidance, Navigation and Control Conference. IEEE, 2016. 2011–2015

  69. Huang Y, Tang J, Lao S. UAV group formation collision avoidance method based on second-order consensus algorithm and improved artificial potential field. Symmetry, 2019, 11: 1162

    Google Scholar 

  70. Zhao Y, Jiao L, Zhou R, et al. UAV formation control with obstacle avoidance using improved artificial potential fields. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Chinese Control Conference. IEEE, 2017. 6219–6224

  71. Sun J, Tang J, Lao S. Collision avoidance for cooperative UAVS with optimized artificial potential field algorithm. IEEE Access, 2017, 5: 18382–18390

    Google Scholar 

  72. Wang H, Cao M, Jiang H, et al. Feasible computationally efficient path planning for UAV collision avoidance. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Control and Automation. IEEE, 2018. 576–581

  73. Borenstein J, Koren Y. The vector field histogram-fast obstacle avoidance for mobile robots. IEEE Trans Robot Automat, 1991, 7: 278–288

    Google Scholar 

  74. Borenstein J, Koren Y. Real-time obstacle avoidance for fast mobile robots in cluttered environments. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. IEEE, 1990. 572–577

  75. Ulrich I, Borenstein J. VFH+: Reliable obstacle avoidance for fast mobile robots. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. IEEE, 2002. 1572–1577

  76. Ulrich I, Borenstein J. VFH*: Local obstacle avoidance with look-ahead verification. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. IEEE, 2000. 2505–2511

  77. Vanneste S, Bellekens B, Weyn M. 3DVFH+: Real-time three-dimensional obstacle avoidance using an octomap. In: Proceedings of the Morse, Volume 1319, 2014. 91–102

  78. Pivtoraiko M, Kelly A. Generating near minimal spanning control sets for constrained motion planning in discrete state spaces. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems. IEEE, 2005. 3231–3237

  79. Liu S, Mohta K, Atanasov N, et al. Search-based motion planning for aggressive flight in SE(3). IEEE Robot Autom Lett, 2018, 3: 2439–2446

    Google Scholar 

  80. Howard T M, Green C J, Kelly A, et al. State space sampling of feasible motions for high-performance mobile robot navigation in complex environments. J Field Robotics, 2008, 25: 325–345

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  81. Liu S, Atanasov N, Mohta K, et al. Search-based motion planning for quadrotors using linear quadratic minimum time control. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems. IEEE, 2017. 2872–2879

  82. Lugo-CÃrdenas I, Flores G, Salazar S, et al. Dubins path generation for a fixed wing UAV. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Unmanned Aircraft Systems. Orlando, 2014. 339–346

  83. Song X, Hu S. 2D path planning with dubins-path-based A* algorithm for a fixed-wing UAV. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international Conference on Control Science and Systems Engineering. IEEE, 2017. 69–73

  84. Ding W, Gao W, Wang K, et al. An efficient B-spline-based kinodynamic replanning framework for quadrotors. IEEE Trans Robot, 2019, 35: 1287–1306

    Google Scholar 

  85. Zhou B, Gao F, Wang L, et al. Robust and efficient quadrotor trajectory generation for fast autonomous flight. IEEE Robot Autom Lett, 2019, 4: 3529–3536

    Google Scholar 

  86. Santos M A, Ferramosca A, Raffo G V. Tube-based MPC with nonlinear control for load transportation using a UAV. IFAC-PapersOnLine, 2018, 51: 459–465

    Google Scholar 

  87. Wang Q, Zhang J J. MPC and TGFC for UAV real-time route planning. In: Proceedings of the Chinese Control Conference. Dalian, 2017. 6847–6850

  88. Arya S R, Ashokkumar C R, Arya H. Gamma and velocity tracking for UAV obstacle avoidance in pitch plane. In: Proceedings of the Indian Control Conference. Hyderabad, 2016. 362–368

  89. Mohammadi A, Feng Y, Zhang C, et al. Vision-based autonomous landing using an MPC-controlled micro UAV on a moving platform. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Unmanned Aircraft Systems. Athens, 2020. 771–780

  90. Wang Y, Zhang T, Cai Z, et al. Multi-UAV coordination control by chaotic grey wolf optimization based distributed MPC with event-triggered strategy. Chin J Aeronautics, 2020, 33: 2877–2897

    Google Scholar 

  91. Ille M, Namerikawa T. Collision avoidance between multi-UAV-systems considering formation control using MPC. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Advanced Intelligent Mechatronics. IEEE, 2017. 651–656

  92. Zhao W H, Go T H. Robust decentralized formation flight control. Int J Aerospace Eng, 2011, 2011: 1–13

    Google Scholar 

  93. Kuriki Y, Namerikawa T. Formation control with collision avoidance for a multi-UAV system using decentralized MPC and consensus-based control. SICE J Control Measurement Syst Integration, 2015, 8: 285–294

    Google Scholar 

  94. Prach A, Kayacan E. An MPC-based position controller for a tilt-rotor tricopter VTOL UAV. Optim Control Appl Meth, 2018, 39: 343–356

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  95. Fang B, Feng X, Xu S. Research on cooperative collision avoidance problem of multiple UAV based on reinforcement learning. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent Computation Technology and Automation. Changsha, 2017. 103–109

  96. Zhao Y, Zheng Z, Zhang X, et al. Q learning algorithm based UAV path learning and obstacle avoidence approach. In: Proceedings of the Chinese Control Conference. Xiamen, 2017. 3397–3402

  97. Ma Z, Wang C, Niu Y, et al. A saliency-based reinforcement learning approach for a UAV to avoid flying obstacles. Robotics Autonomous Syst, 2018, 100: 108–118

    Google Scholar 

  98. Singla A, Padakandla S, Bhatnagar S. Memory-based deep reinforcement learning for obstacle avoidance in UAV with limited environment knowledge. IEEE Trans Intell Transp Syst, 2019, 22: 107–118

    Google Scholar 

  99. Han X, Wang J, Xue J, et al. Intelligent decision-making for 3-dimensional dynamic obstacle avoidance of UAV based on deep reinforcement learning. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Wireless Communications and Signal Processing. Xi’an, 2019. 1–6

  100. Wang D, Fan T, Han T, et al. A two-stage reinforcement learning approach for multi-UAV collision avoidance under imperfect sensing. IEEE Robot Autom Lett, 2020, 5: 3098–3105

    Google Scholar 

  101. He L, Aouf N, Whidborne J F, et al. Deep reinforcement learning based local planner for UAV obstacle avoidance using demonstration data. arXiv: 2008.02521

  102. Zhao W, Chu H, Miao X, et al. Research on the multiagent joint proximal policy optimization algorithm controlling cooperative fixed-wing UAV obstacle avoidance. Sensors, 2020, 20: 4546

    Google Scholar 

  103. Lundell M, Tang J, Nygard K. Fuzzy Petri net for UAV decision making. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Symposium on Collaborative Technologies and Systems. IEEE, 2005. 347–352

  104. Pradhan S, Parhi D, Panda A. Motion control and navigation of multiple mobile robots for obstacle avoidance and target seeking: A rule-based neuro-fuzzy technique. In: Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part I-Journal of Systems and Control Engineering, 2009. 275–287

  105. Pothal J K, Parhi D R. Navigation of multiple mobile robots in a highly clutter terrains using adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system. Robotics Autonomous Syst, 2015, 72: 48–58

    Google Scholar 

  106. Cheng H, Page J, Olsen J. Cooperative control of UAV swarm via information measures. Int Jnl Intel Unmanned Syst, 2013, 1: 256–275

    Google Scholar 

  107. Khachumov M. The problems of multi-point route planning and rule-based trajectory tracking for an autonomous UAV under wind loads. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Workshop on Advanced Motion Control. IEEE, 2018. 204–208

  108. Keneni B M, Kaur D, Al Bataineh A, et al. Evolving rule-based explainable artificial intelligence for unmanned aerial vehicles. IEEE Access, 2019, 7: 17001–17016

    Google Scholar 

  109. Khachumov M. A rule-based approach for controlling UAVs formation flight. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Electromechanics and Robotics Avalishin’s Readings. Kursk, 2020. 319–330

  110. Muni M K, Parhi D R, Kumar P B, et al. Navigational analysis of multiple humanoids using a hybridized rule base-Sugeno fuzzy controller. Int J Hum Robot, 2020, 17: 2050017

    Google Scholar 

  111. Malyuta D, Reynolds T P, Szmuk M, et al. Convex optimization for trajectory generation. arXiv: 2106.09125

  112. Choudhury S, Solovey K, Kochenderfer M J, et al. Efficient large-scale multi-drone delivery using transit networks. J Artif Intell Res, 2021, 70: 757–788

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  113. Tordesillas J, Lopez B T, Carter J, et al. Real-time planning with multi-fidelity models for agile flights in unknown environments. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Robotics and Automation. Montreal: IEEE Press, 2019. 725–731

  114. Yadav I, Tanner H G. Reactive receding horizon planning and control for quadrotors with limited on-board sensing. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems. IEEE, 2020. 7058–7063

  115. Natarajan R, Choset H, Likhachev M. Interleaving graph search and trajectory optimization for aggressive quadrotor flight. IEEE Robot Autom Lett, 2021, 6: 5357–5364

    Google Scholar 

  116. Mohta K, Watterson M, Mulgaonkar Y, et al. Fast, autonomous flight in GPS-denied and cluttered environments. J Field Robotics, 2018, 35: 101–120

    Google Scholar 

  117. Tang L, Wang H, Liu Z, et al. A real-time quadrotor trajectory planning framework based on B-spline and nonuniform kinodynamic search. J Field Robotics, 2021, 38: 452–475

    Google Scholar 

  118. Tordesillas J, Lopez B T, How J P. Faster: Fast and safe trajectory planner for flights in unknown environments. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems. IEEE, 2019. 1934–1940

  119. Gao F, Wu W, Lin Y, et al. Online safe trajectory generation for quadrotors using fast marching method and bernstein basis polynomial. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. IEEE, 2018. 344–351

  120. Liu S, Watterson M, Mohta K, et al. Planning dynamically feasible trajectories for quadrotors using safe flight corridors in 3-D complex environments. IEEE Robot Autom Lett, 2017, 2: 1688–1695

    Google Scholar 

  121. Watterson M, Liu S, Sun K, et al. Trajectory optimization on manifolds with applications to quadrotor systems. Int J Robotics Res, 2020, 39: 303–320

    Google Scholar 

  122. Tordesillas J, How J P. MADER: Trajectory planner in multiagent and dynamic environments. IEEE Trans Robot, 2021, 38: 463–476

    Google Scholar 

  123. Tordesillas J, How J P. PANTHER: Perception-aware trajectory planner in dynamic environments. IEEE Access, 2021, 10: 22662–22677

    Google Scholar 

  124. Lieb J, Peklar G. Evaluation of an unique communication interface system D2X for UAVs intercommunicating with air and ground UTM users. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Integrated Communications, Navigation and Surveillance Conference. IEEE, 2019. 1–9

  125. Alipour-Fanid A, Dabaghchian M, Wang N, et al. Machine learning-based delay-aware UAV detection and operation mode identification over encrypted Wi-Fi traffic. IEEE Trans Inform Forensic Secur, 2019, 15: 2346–2360

    Google Scholar 

  126. Wang Z, Duan L, Zhang R. Traffic-aware adaptive deployment for UAV-aided communication networks. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Global Communications Conference. IEEE, 2018. 1–6

  127. Zhu S, Gui L, Cheng N, et al. Joint design of access point selection and path planning for UAV-assisted cellular networks. IEEE Internet Things J, 2019, 7: 220–233

    Google Scholar 

  128. Zhao N, Fan P, Cheng Y. Dynamic contract incentives mechanism for traffic offloading in multi-UAV networks. Wireless Commun Mobile Computing, 2020, 2020: 1–11

    Google Scholar 

  129. Zhang S, Zhang R. Radio map-based 3D path planning for cellular-connected UAV. IEEE Trans Wireless Commun, 2020, 20: 1975–1989

    Google Scholar 

  130. Tafintsev N, Moltchanov D, Andreev S, et al. Handling spontaneous traffic variations in 5G+ via offloading onto mmWave-capable UAV bridges. IEEE Trans Veh Technol, 2020, 69: 10070–10084

    Google Scholar 

  131. Liu B, Zhang W, Chen W, et al. Online computation offloading and traffic routing for UAV swarms in edge-cloud computing. IEEE Trans Veh Technol, 2020, 69: 8777–8791

    Google Scholar 

  132. Changizi A, Emadi M J. Age-optimal path planning for finite-battery UAV-assisted data dissemination in IoT networks. IET Commun, 2021, 15: 1287–1296

    Google Scholar 

  133. Li Y, Zhang Y, Wang L, et al. Research on potential ground risk regions of aircraft crashes based on ADS-B flight tracking data and GIS. J Transp Saf Security, 2022, 14: 152–176

    Google Scholar 

  134. Languell Z P, Gu Q. Securing ADS-B with multi-point distance-bounding for UAV collision avoidance. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Mobile Ad Hoc and Sensor Systems. IEEE, 2019. 145–153

  135. Dästner K, Brunessaux S, Schmid E, et al. Classification of military aircraft in real-time radar systems based on supervised machine learning with labelled ADS-B data. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Sensor Data Fusion: Trends, Solutions, Applications. IEEE, 2018. 1–6

  136. Stevens M N, Atkins E M. Multi-mode guidance for an independent multicopter geofencing system. In: Proceedings of the Aviation Technology, Integration, and Operations Conference. Washington D.C., 2016. 3150

  137. D’Souza S, Ishihara A, Nikaido B, et al. Feasibility of varying geofence around an unmanned aircraft operation based on vehicle performance and wind. In: Proceedings of the Digital Avionics Systems Conference. Sacramento, 2016. 1–10

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Automation, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Xi’an, 710072, China

    JinWen Hu, Teng Wang, HaoZhe Zhang & Quan Pan

  2. School of Electronics and Information, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Xi’an, 710072, China

    JianDong Zhang & Zhao Xu

Authors
  1. JinWen Hu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Teng Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. HaoZhe Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Quan Pan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. JianDong Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Zhao Xu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to JianDong Zhang.

Additional information

This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 61803309), the New Concept Air Combat Weapon Technology Innovation Workstation (Grant No. 20-163-00-GZ-016-001-01), the Aeronautical Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 019ZA053008 and 20185553034), and the CETC Key Laboratory of Data Link Technology Open Project Fund (Grant No. CLDL-20202101_2).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hu, J., Wang, T., Zhang, H. et al. A review of rule-based collision avoidance technology for autonomous UAV. Sci. China Technol. Sci. 66, 2481–2499 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11431-022-2264-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11431-022-2264-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation