Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T08:09:15.717Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Dynamic Collision Avoidance Algorithm for Unmanned Surface Vehicles via Layered Artificial Potential Field with Collision Cone

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 May 2020

Xinli Xu ,
Wei Pan ,
Yubo Huang  and
Weidong Zhang
Xinli Xu
Affiliation:
(Department of Automation, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai200240, China)
Wei Pan
Affiliation:
(Department of Automation, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai200240, China)
Yubo Huang
Affiliation:
(Department of Automation, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai200240, China)
Weidong Zhang*
Affiliation:
(Department of Automation, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai200240, China)
*
(E-mail: [email protected])
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A dynamic collision avoidance algorithm via layered artificial potential field with collision cone (LAPF-CC) is proposed to overcome the shortcomings of the traditional artificial potential field method in dynamic collision avoidance. In order to reduce invalid actions for collision avoidance, the potential field is divided into four layers, and a collision cone with risk detection function is introduced. Relative distance and relative velocity are used as variables to establish the risk of collision, and a torque named ‘speed torque’ is constructed. Speed torque, attractive force and repulsive force work together to change the speed and heading of the unmanned surface vehicle (USV). Driving force and torque are controlled separately, which makes it possible for the LAPF-CC algorithm to be used for real-time collision avoidance control of underactuated USVs. Simulation results show that the LAPF-CC algorithm performs well in dynamic collision avoidance.

Keywords

Unmanned Surface VehicleShip CollisionDynamicAlgorithm
Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Navigation , Volume 73 , Issue 6 , November 2020 , pp. 1306 - 1325
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal Institute of Navigation 2020

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

REFERENCES

Cheng, Y., Sun, Z., Huang, Y. and Zhang, W. (2019). Fuzzy categorical deep reinforcement learning of a defensive game for an unmanned surface vessel. International Journal of Fuzzy Systems, 21(2), 592–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chu, Z. and Zhu, D. (2018). Obstacle Avoidance Trajectory Planning and Trajectory Tracking Control for Autonomous Underwater Vehicles. 2018. 13th World Congress on Intelligent Control and Automation (WCICA), JUL 4–8, 2018, Changsha, PEOPLES R CHINA, pp. 450–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fan, Z. and Li, H. (2017). Two-Layer Model Predictive Formation Control of Unmanned Surface Vehicle. 2017 Chinese Automation Congress (CAC), OCT 20–22, 2017, Jinan, Peoples R China, pp. 6002–6007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiorini, P. and Shiller, Z. (1998). Motion planning in dynamic environments using velocity obstacles. The International Journal of Robotics Research, 17(7), 760–772.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fişkin, R., Kişi, H. and Nasibov, E. (2018). A research on techniques, models and methods proposed for ship collision avoidance path planning problem. International Journal Maritime Engineering, 160(A2), 187–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fossen, T. I. (2011). Handbook of Marine Craft Hydrodynamics and Motion Control. New York: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huang, Y., Chen, L., Chen, P., Negenborn, R. R. and van Gelder, P. H. A. J. M. (2020). Ship collision avoidance methods: State-of-the-art. Safety Science, 121, 451–473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Khatib, O. (1986). Real-time obstacle avoidance for manipulators and mobile robots. International Journal of Robotics Research, 5(1), 90–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, L., Wang, D., Peng, Z., Chen, C. L. P. and Li, T. (2019). Bounded neural network control for target tracking of underactuated autonomous surface vehicles in the presence of uncertain target dynamics. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems, 30(4), 1241–1249.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lu, Y., Zhang, G., Sun, Z. and Zhang, W. (2018). Robust adaptive formation control of underactuated autonomous surface vessels based on MLP and DOB. Nonlinear Dynamics, 94(1), 503–519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Park, B. S. and Yoo, S. J. (2019). Adaptive-observer-based formation tracking of networked uncertain underactuated surface vessels with connectivity preservation and collision avoidance. Journal of the Franklin Institute, 356(15), 7947–7966.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perez, T. (2006). Ship Motion Control: Course Keeping and Roll Stabilisation Using Rudder and Fins. London: Springer.Google Scholar
Qin, H., Wu, Z., Sun, Y. and Sun, Y. (2019). Prescribed performance adaptive fault-tolerant trajectory tracking control for an ocean bottom flying node. International Journal of Advanced Robotic Systems, 16(3), 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Song, A. L., Su, B. Y., Dong, C. Z., Shen, D. W., Xiang, E. Z. and Mao, F. P. (2018). A two-level dynamic obstacle avoidance algorithm for unmanned surface vehicles. Ocean Engineering, 170, 351–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Statheros, T., Howells, G. and Maier, K. M. (2008). Autonomous ship collision avoidance navigation concepts, technologies and techniques. Journal of Navigation, 61(01), 129–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tam, C., Bucknall, R. and Greig, A. (2009). Review of collision avoidance and path planning methods for ships in close range encounters. Journal of Navigation, 62(03), 455–467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, X., Zhang, G., Sun, Y., Cao, J., Wan, L., Sheng, M. and Liu, Y. (2019). AUV near-wall-following control based on adaptive disturbance observer. Ocean Engineering, 190(15), 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xargay, E., Kaminer, I., Pascoal, A., Hovakimyan, N., Dobrokhodov, V., Cichella, V. and Ghabcheloo, R. (2013). Time-critical cooperative path following of multiple unmanned aerial vehicles over time-varying networks. Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, 36(2), 499–516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xu, H., Rong, H. and Soares, C. G. (2019). Use of AIS data for guidance and control of path-following autonomous vessels. Ocean Engineering, 194, 106635.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yao, Y., Zhou, X., Zhang, K. and Dong, D. (2010). Dynamic trajectory planning for unmanned aerial vehicle based on sparse A* search and improved artificial potential field. Control Theory & Applications, 27(7), 953–959.Google Scholar
Zhang, G., Deng, Y., Zhang, W. and Huang, C. (2018a). Novel DVS guidance and path-following control for underactuated ships in presence of multiple static and moving obstacles. Ocean Engineering, 170(11), 100–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, G., Huang, C., Zhang, X. and Zhang, W. (2018b). Practical constrained dynamic positioning control for uncertain ship via the MLP technique. IET Control Theory & Applications, 12(18), 2526–2533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, G., Huang, C., Zhang, X. and Tian, B. (2019). Robust adaptive control for dynamic positioning ships in the presence of input constraints. Journal of Marine Science and Technology, 24(4), 1172–1182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar