Advertisement

Feature and Performance Comparison of the V-REP, Gazebo and ARGoS Robot Simulators

  • Lenka Pitonakova
  • Manuel Giuliani
  • Anthony Pipe
  • Alan Winfield
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10965)

Abstract

In this paper, the characteristics and performance of three open-source simulators for robotics, V-REP, Gazebo and ARGoS, are thoroughly analysed and compared. While they all allow for programming in C++, they also represent clear alternatives when it comes to the trade-off between complexity and performance. Attention is given to their built-in features, robot libraries, programming methods and the usability of their user interfaces. Benchmark test results are reported in order to identify how well the simulators can cope with environments of varying complexity. The richness of features of V-REP and the strong performance of Gazebo and ARGoS in complex scenes are highlighted. Various usability issues of Gazebo are also noted.

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by EPSRC Programme Grant “Robotics for Nuclear Environments”, grant ref: EP/P01366X/1. We would like to thank Farshad Arvin, Tareq Assaf, Giovanni Beltrame, Paul Bremner, Ales Leonardis, Carlo Pinciroli, Chie Takahashi, Simon Watson and Craig West for sharing their opinions and insights into various aspects of simulation work. We would also like to thank Xavier Poteau, who created the sample industrial building CAD model.

References

  1. 1.
    Andrews, P.S., Stepney, S., Timmis, J.: Simulation as a scientific instrument. In: Stepney, S., Andrews, P.S., Read, M.N. (eds.) Proceedings of the 2012 Workshop on Complex Systems Modelling and Simulation, pp. 1–10. Luniver Press (2012)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rohmer, E., Singh, S.P.N., Freese, M.: V-REP: a versatile and scalable robot simulation framework. In: Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS 2013). IEEE Press, Piscataway (2013).  https://doi.org/10.1109/IROS.2013.6696520
  3. 3.
    Koenig, N., Howard, A.: Design and use paradigms for Gazebo, an open-source multi-robot simulator. In: Proceedings of the 2004 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS 2004), pp. 2149–2154. IEEE Press, Piscataway (2004)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Pinciroli, C., Trianni, V., et al.: ARGoS: a modular, parallel, multi-engine simulator for multi-robot systems. Swarm Intell. 6(4), 271–295 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Craighead, J., Murphy, R., Burke, J., Goldiez, B.: A survey of commercial & open source unmanned vehicle simulators. In: Proceedings of the 2007 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA 2007), pp. 852–857. IEEE, Piscataway (2007)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Žlajpah, L.: Simulation in robotics. Math. Comput. Simul. 79, 879–897 (2008)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kramer, J., Scheutz, M.: Development environments for autonomous mobile robots: a survey. Autonom. Robot. 22(2), 101–132 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Harris, A., Conrad, J.M.: Survey of popular robotics simulators, frameworks, and toolkits. In: Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE Southeastcon, pp. 243–249 (2011)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Staranowicz, A., Mariottini, G.L.: A survey and comparison of commercial and open-source robotic simulator software. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on PErvasive Technologies Related to Assistive Environments (PETRA 2011). ACM, New York (2011).  https://doi.org/10.1145/2141622.2141689
  10. 10.
    Quigley, M., Gerkey, B., et al.: ROS: an open-source robot operating system. In: Proceedings of the ICRA 2009 Workshop on Open Source Software (2009)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mondada, F., Bonani, M., et al.: The e-puck, a robot designed for education in engineering. In: Goncalves, P.J.S., Torres, P.J.D., Alves, C.M.O. (eds.) Proceedings of the 9th Conference on Autonomous Robot Systems and Competitions (ROBOTICA 2009), vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 59–65 (2009)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bonani, M., Longchamp, V., et al.: The MarXbot, a miniature mobile robot opening new perspectives for the collective-robotic research. In: Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS 2010), pp. 4187–4193. IEEE Press, Piscataway (2010)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ducatelle, F., Di Caro, G.A., et al.: Self-organized cooperation between robotic swarms. Swarm Intell. 5(2), 73–96 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Spiri Specifications. http://pleiadesrobotics.com. Accessed 18 Apr 2018
  15. 15.
    QT. https://www.qt.io. Accessed 18 Apr 2018
  16. 16.
    Pioneer 3AT Specifications. http://bit.ly/2D2VfSR. Accessed 18 Apr 2018
  17. 17.
    Rubenstein, M., Ahler, C., Nagpal, R.: Kilobot: a low cost scalable robot system for collective behaviors. In: Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA 2012), pp. 3293–3298. Computer Society Press of the IEEE, Washington, D.C. (2012)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lenka Pitonakova
    • 1
  • Manuel Giuliani
    • 1
  • Anthony Pipe
    • 1
  • Alan Winfield
    • 1
  1. 1.Bristol Robotics LaboratoryUniversity of the West of England, BristolBristolUK

Personalised recommendations