Implementation of an Autonomous Tool Trolley in a Production Line

  • Heiko EngemannEmail author
  • Sriram Badri
  • Marius Wenning
  • Stephan Kallweit
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 980)


In recent years, the rising demand for customised products has changed the requirements for industrial production. Nonetheless human workers are still an important part of the production process, especially in the area of final assembly. In the production of small series as well as customer-configured products, tools for different work tasks are used on different workstations at various instances of time. This paper documents the development of an autonomous tool trolley (ATT), which makes the production equipment effortless available directly at the required location. The implemented control system is based on the Robot Operating System (ROS) and provides autonomous navigation functionalities. An experiment compares different sensor concepts used for localisation. The experiments are performed in the unstructured environment of an industrial production line. The best preforming sensor setup is used for the task of autonomous navigation. A final experiment proves that the positioning accuracy of the developed ATT is suitable for the tool delivery task.


Mobile robotics Industrial production Robot Operating System 



The results in this paper were achieved within the project “A4BLUE: Adaptive Automation in Assembly for BLUE collar workers satisfaction in Evolvable context” funded by the European Commission (H2020); Grant Agreement Number 723 828.


  1. 1.
    Tseng, M.: Industry development perspectives: global distribution of work and market. CIRP 53rd General Assembly, Montreal, Canada (2003)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Asadi, N., Fundin, A., Jackson, M.: The essential constituents of flexible assembly systems: a case study in the heavy vehicle manufacturing industry. Global J. Flex. Syst. Manage. 16(3), 235–250 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Toni, A.D., Tonchia, S.: Manufacturing flexibility: a literature review. Int. J. Prod. Res. 36(6), 1587–1617 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fletcher, S., Johnson, T., Larreina, J.: Putting people and robots together in manufacturing: are we ready? (2017)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hall, A., Tiemann, M.: Abschlussbericht BIBB/BAuA-Erwerbstätigenbefragung 2012, p. 20–21 (2012)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Madsen, O., Bøgh, S., Schou, C., Andersen, R.S., Damgaard, J.S., Pedersen, M.R., et al.: Integration of mobile manipulators in an industrial production. Ind. Robot Int. J. 42(1), 11–18 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Saenz, J., Penzlin, F., Vogel, C., Fritzsche, M.: VALERI–a collaborative mobile manipulator for aerospace production. In: Advances in Cooperative Robotics, p. 186–195. World Scientific (2017)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cherubini, A., Passama, R., Crosnier, A., Lasnier, A., Fraisse, P.: Collaborative manufacturing with physical human-robot interaction. Robot. Comput.-Integr. Manuf. 40, 1–13 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Morioka, M., Sakakibara, S.: A new cell production assembly system with human-robot cooperation. CIRP Ann. 59(1), 9–12 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Tsarouchi, P., Matthaiakis, A.S., Makris, S., Chryssolouris, G.: On a human-robot collaboration in an assembly cell. Robot. Comput. Integr. Manuf. 30(6), 580–589 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Saenz, J., Elkmann, N., Gibaru, O., Neto, P.: Survey of methods for design of collaborative robotics applications-Why safety is a barrier to more widespread robotics uptake. In: Proceedings of the 2018 4th International Conference on Mechatronics and Robotics Engineering, p. 95–101. ACM (2018)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Quigley, M., Conley, K., Gerkey, B.P., Faust, J., Foote, T., Leibs, J., et al.: ROS: an open-source Robot Operating System. In: ICRA Workshop on Open Source Software (2009)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Moore, T., Stouch, D.: A generalized extended Kalman filter implementation for the robot operating system. In: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Intelligent Autonomous Systems (IAS-13), Springer, Cham (2014)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wan, E.A., Van Der Merwe, R.: The unscented Kalman filter for nonlinear estimation. In: Adaptive Systems for Signal Processing, Communications, and Control Symposium 2000, AS-SPCC, The IEEE 2000, p. 153–158. IEEE (2000)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kumar, S., Prakash, J., Kanagasabapathy, P.: A critical evaluation and experimental verification of Extended Kalman Filter, Unscented Kalman Filter and Neural State Filter for state estimation of three phase induction motor. Appl. Soft Comput. 11(3), 3199–3208 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Orderud, F.: Comparison of Kalman filter estimation approaches for state space models with nonlinear measurements. In: Proceedings of Scandinavian Conference on Simulation and Modeling, p. 1–8 (2005)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    LaViola, J.J.: A comparison of unscented and extended Kalman filtering for estimating quaternion motion. In: Proceedings of the 2003 American Control Conference, 2003, vol. 3, p. 2435–2440. IEEE (2003)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    St-Pierre, M., Gingras, D.: Comparison between the unscented Kalman filter and the extended Kalman filter for the position estimation module of an integrated navigation information system. In: IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium, p. 831–835. Citeseer (2004)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Fox, D.: KLD-sampling: adaptive particle filters and mobile robot localization. In: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS) (2001)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Grisetti, G.: Improving grid-based slam with rao-blackwellized particle filters by adaptive proposals and selective resampling. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics & Automation (ICRA), p. 2443–2448 (2005)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Grisetti, G., Stachniss, C., Burgard, W.: Improved techniques for grid mapping with Rao-Blackwellized particle filters. IEEE Trans. Robot. 23, 34 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Abdelrasoul, Y., Absh, S., Sebastian P.: A quantitative study of tuning ROS gmapping parameters and their effect on performing indoor 2D SLAM. In: 2016 2nd IEEE International Symposium on Robotics and Manufacturing Automation (ROMA), p. 1–6 (2016)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Zaman, S., Slany, W., Steinbauer, G.: ROS-based mapping, localization and autonomous navigation using a Pioneer 3-DX robot and their relevant issues. In: Electronics, Communications and Photonics Conference (SIECPC), 2011 Saudi International, p. 1–5. IEEE (2011)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Brock, O., Khatib, O.: High-speed navigation using the global dynamic window approach. In: Proceedings of 1999 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, vol. 1, p. 341–346. IEEE (1999)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Fox, D., Burgard, W., Thrun, S.: The dynamic window approach to collision avoidance. IEEE Robot. Autom. Mag. 4(1), 23–33 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Heiko Engemann
    • 1
    Email author
  • Sriram Badri
    • 2
  • Marius Wenning
    • 2
  • Stephan Kallweit
    • 3
  1. 1.Tshwane University of TechnologyPretoriaSouth Africa
  2. 2.Chair of Production Engineering of E-Mobility Components (PEM)RWTH Aachen UniversityAachenGermany
  3. 3.Faculty of Mechanical Engineering and MechatronicsUniversity of Applied Sciences AachenAachenGermany

Personalised recommendations