reciprocal collision avoidance for quadrotor helicopters
play

Reciprocal Collision Avoidance for Quadrotor Helicopters using LQR- - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Reciprocal Collision Avoidance for Quadrotor Helicopters using LQR- Obstacles Daman F. Bareiss Jur Van Den Berg Algorithmic Robotics Laboratory (ARL) Problem Statement n Multiple robots with linear dynamics in a common workspace n


  1. Reciprocal Collision Avoidance for Quadrotor Helicopters using LQR- Obstacles Daman F. Bareiss Jur Van Den Berg Algorithmic Robotics Laboratory (ARL)

  2. Problem Statement n Multiple robots with linear dynamics in a common workspace n Decentralized collision avoidance without communication between the robots n Similar to humans walking, on a campus for example n How can it be done? The University of Utah

  3. Velocity Obstacles n All velocities resulting in a collision between agent A and agent B [Fiorini, Shiller, ‘98] n Used for reactive collision avoidance among agents The University of Utah

  4. Control Obstacle n Need obstacle for robots with dynamics ¡ VO’s do not consider robots with dynamics n Prefer higher-level control obstacle ¡ Low-level control obstacle is difficult n For quadrotors, selecting a position or velocity is much simpler than individual motor thrusts The University of Utah

  5. LQR Feedback Control n Optimally control robot towards a goal without applying extreme control inputs n Dynamics: n Cost: n Control Input Minimizing Cost: n Higher-Level Control Input: The University of Utah

  6. LQR Feedback Control n Closed-Loop Dynamics: n Relative Formulation: n Know how to control, but when do the robots collide? The University of Utah

  7. Collision n Definition: The University of Utah

  8. Relative LQR-Obstacles n Given relative state: The University of Utah

  9. Avoiding Collisions n The LQR-Obstacle defines a set of relative target velocities that would result in collision n To avoid collision target velocity must not be within that space: n Equivalent of VO for robots with dynamics [van den Berg, 2012] The University of Utah

  10. RCA – Pair of Robots n Only accounts for passive robots, must expand for active robots n Must consider action of other robot or oscillations in motion can occur n Designed for each robot to take 50% of the responsibility The University of Utah

  11. RCA – Pair of Robots n Relative target velocity must be chosen: n Must define set of potential target velocities, or RCA set The University of Utah

  12. RCA – Pair of Robots The University of Utah

  13. RCA – Multiple Robots n Each robot creates an RCA with respect to every other robot n The combination of these creates a target set avoiding collisions with every robot The University of Utah

  14. Determining Preferred Velocity n Given a goal position, what velocity is required? n Knowing that preferred velocity, find the closest such velocity that avoids collision n Use of a second layer of LQR control: ¡ Cost: ¡ Substitute initial control policy: ¡ New control policy: The University of Utah

  15. Implementation Details n C++ Simulator n Qhull Library for convex hull of ellipsoids n GJK-Algorithm to find escape velocity n RVO2 Library for linear programming n Simulation Computer Specifications: ¡ Windows 7 Professional 64-bit ¡ Intel i7-2600 CPU, 8GB RAM The University of Utah

  16. Results – 2 Quadrotors n Videos can be found at: ¡ http://arl.cs.utah.edu/research/rca/ The University of Utah

  17. Results – 24 Quadrotors n Videos can be found at: ¡ http://arl.cs.utah.edu/research/rca/ The University of Utah

  18. Results – 100 Quadrotors n Videos can be found at: ¡ http://arl.cs.utah.edu/research/rca/ The University of Utah

  19. Results The University of Utah

  20. Conclusions n Simulation results displayed validity of our approach. n Robots with linear dynamics were able to independently navigate to a goal position with no communication between the robots in real time The University of Utah

  21. Conclusions n Limitations ¡ Requires position and velocity to be contained in the state of the robot ¡ Geometry of robot translates but does not rotate ¡ Robots of same dynamics ¡ Requires full state observation The University of Utah

  22. Future Work n Expanding algorithm for robots with different dynamics n Incorporating a state estimator with possible uncertainties n Implement algorithm on real quadrotors to obtain physical data The University of Utah

  23. Questions The University of Utah

Download Presentation
Download Policy: The content available on the website is offered to you 'AS IS' for your personal information and use only. It cannot be commercialized, licensed, or distributed on other websites without prior consent from the author. To download a presentation, simply click this link. If you encounter any difficulties during the download process, it's possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

Recommend


More recommend