Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T21:35:34.613Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Turnover prevention of a mobile robot on uneven terrain using the concept of stability space

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 August 2008

Jeong-Hee Lee ,
Jae-Byung Park  and
Beom-Hee Lee
Jeong-Hee Lee*
Affiliation:
School of Electrical Engineering, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea.
Jae-Byung Park
Affiliation:
Division of Electronics and Information Engineering, Chonbuk National University, Jeonju, Korea.
Beom-Hee Lee
Affiliation:
School of Electrical Engineering, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea.
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Mobile robots in field environment travel not only on even terrain but also on uneven or sloped terrain. Practical methods for preventing turnover of the mobile robot are essential since the turnover of the mobile robot is very perilous. This paper proposes an efficient algorithm for preventing turnover of a mobile robot on uneven terrain by controlling linear acceleration and rotational velocity of the mobile robot. The concept of the modified zero moment point (ZMP) is proposed for evaluating the potential turnover of the mobile robot. Also, the turnover stability indices for linear acceleration and rotational velocity are defined with the modified ZMP. The turnover stability space (TSS) with turnover stability indices is presented to control the mobile robot in order to avoid turnover effectively. Finally, the feasibility and effectiveness of the proposed algorithm are verified through simulations conducted on a three-wheeled mobile robot.

Keywords

Modified zero moment pointTurnover preventionTurnover stability indexTurnover stability space
Type
Article
Information
Robotica , Volume 27 , Issue 5 , September 2009 , pp. 641 - 652
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Chakravarthy, A. and Ghose, D., “Obstacle avoidance in a dynamic environment: A collision cone approach,” IEEE Trans. Syst., Man, Cybernet.-Part A: Syst. Humans 28 (5), 562–574 (Sep. 1998).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Kheradpir, S. and Thorp, J. S., “Real-time control of robot manipulators in the presence of obstacles,” IEEE Trans. Rob. Automat. 4 (6), 687–698 (Dec. 1988).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Antonelli, G., Chiaverini, S., Finotello, R. and Schiavon, R., “Real-time path planning and obstacle avoidance for RAIS: An autonomous underwater vehicle,” IEEE J. Oceanic Eng. 26 (2), 216–227 (Apr. 2001).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Borenstein, J. and Koren, Y., “Histogramic in-motion mapping for mobile robot obstacle avoidance,” IEEE Trans. Rob. Automat. 7 (4), 535–539 (Aug. 1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5. Borenstein, J. and Koren, Y., “The vector field histogram-fast obstacle avoidance for mobile robots,” IEEE Trans. Rob. Automat. 7 (3), 278–288 (Jun. 1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6. Chang, C., Chung, M. J. and Lee, B. H., “Collision avoidance of two general robot manipulators by minimum delay time,” IEEE Trans. Syst., Man, Cybernet. 24 (3), 517–522 (Sep. 1998).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Cheng, F. T., Lu, Y. T. and Sun, Y. Y., “Window-shaped obstacle avoidance for a redundant manipulator,” IEEE Trans. Syst., Man, Cybernet.-Part B: Cybernet. 28 (6), 806–815 (Dec. 1998).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8. Yoshida, K. and Hamano, H., “Motion Dynamics of a Rover With Slip-Based Traction Model,” IEEE International Conference on Robotics & Automation, Washington, USA, Vol. 3 (May 2002) pp. 3155–3160.Google Scholar
9. Choi, B. J. and Sreenivasan, S. V., “Gross motion characteristics of articulated mobile robots with pure rolling capability on smooth uneven surfaces,” IEEE Trans. Rob. Automat. 15 (2), 340–343 (Apr. 1999).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Choi, B. J. and Sreenivasan, S. V., “Motion Planning of A Wheeled Mobile Robot with Slip-Free Motion Capability on a Smooth Uneven Surface,” IEEE International Conference on Robotics & Automation, Leuven, Belgium, Vol. 4 (May 1998) pp. 3727–3732.Google Scholar
11. Shiller, Z. and Gwo, Y. R., “Dynamic motion planning of autonomous vehicles,” IEEE Trans. Rob. Automat. 7 (2), 241–249 (Apr. 1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Whitehead, R., Travis, W., Bevly, D. M. and Flowers, G., “A Study of the Effect of Various Vehicle Properties on Rollover Propensity,” SAE Paper No. 2004-01-2094 (2004).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13. Acarman, T. and Ozguner, U., “Rollover Prevention for Heavy Trucks using Frequency Shaped Sliding Mode Control,” IEEE Conference on Control Applications, Istanbul, Turkey, Vol. 1 (Jun. 2003) pp. 7–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14. Chen, B. C. and Peng, H., “A Real-time Rollover Threat Index for Sports Utility Vehicles,” American Control Conference, San Diego, USA, Vol. 2 (Jun. 1999) pp. 1233–1237.Google Scholar
15. Takano, S. and Nagai, M., “Dynamics Control of Large Vehicles for Rollover Prevention,” IEEE International Vehicle Electronics Conference, Tottori, Japan (Sep. 2001) pp. 85–89.Google Scholar
16. Papadopoulos, E. G. and Rey, D. A., “A New Measure of Tipover Stability Margin for Mobile Manipulators,” IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Minneapolis, USA, Vol. 4 (Apr. 1996) pp. 3111–3116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17. Rey, D. A. and Papadopoulos, E. G., “On-Line Automatic Tipover Prevention for Mobile Manipulators,” IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Grenoble, France, Vol. 3 (Sep. 1997) pp. 1273–1278.Google Scholar
18. Sugano, S., Huang, Q. and Kato, I., “Stability Criteria in Controlling Mobile Robotic Systems,” IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Yokohama, Japan, Vol. 2 (Jul. 1993) pp. 832–838.Google Scholar
19. Huang, Q., Sugano, S. and Kato, I., “Stability Control for a Mobile Manipulator using a Potential Method,” IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Munich, Germany, Vol. 2 (Sep. 1994) pp. 839–846.Google Scholar
20. Huang, Q., Sugano, S. and Tanie, K., “Stability Compensation of a Mobile Manipulator by Manipulator Motion: Feasibility and Planning,” IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Grenoble, France, Vol. 3 (Sep. 1997) pp. 1285–1292.Google Scholar
21. Huang, Q., Tanie, K. and Sugano, S., “Coordinated motion planning for a mobile manipulator considering stability and manipulation,” Int. J. Rob. Res. 19 (8), 732–742 (Aug. 2000).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22. Lee, J. H., park, J. B. and Lee, B. H., “Slip and Turnover Avoidance Control for a Track-type Mobile Robot,” International Conference on Robot and Systems, New Orleans, USA, Vol. 2 (Sep. 2004) pp. 1832–1837.Google Scholar
23. Park, J. B., Lee, J. H., Kim, G. W. and Lee, B. H., “Collision and Turnover Avoidance of Mobile Robots with Force Reflection,” International Federation of Automatic Control, Prague, Czech (Jul. 2005).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
24. Park, J. B., Lee, J. H. and Lee, B. H., “Online turnover-free control for a mobile agent with a terrain prediction sensor,” J. Field Rob. 23 (1), 59–77 (Jan. 2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
25. Lee, J. H., Park, J. B. and Lee, B. H., “Safety control for turnover avoidance of a tracked mobile robot using stability indices,” Int. J. Assist. Rob. Mechatron. 7 (1), 62–73 (Mar. 2006).Google Scholar
26. Park, J. B., Lee, J. H. and Lee, B. H., “Rollover-free navigation for a mobile agent in an unstructured environment,” IEEE Trans. Syst., Man, Cybernet.-Part B: Cybernet. 36 (3), 835–848 (Aug. 2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar