You are on page 1of 7

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ROBOTICS AND AUTOMATION, VOL. 16, NO.

5, OCTOBER 2000 609

Adaptive Tracking Control of a Nonholonomic II. KINEMATICS AND DYNAMICS OF A NONHOLONOMIC


Mobile Robot MOBILE ROBOT
Consider the following nonholonomic mobile robot that is subject to
Takanori Fukao, Hiroshi Nakagawa, and Norihiko Adachi
m constraints

Abstract—A mobile robot is one of the well-known nonholonomic sys- q + V (q; q_ )q_ + G(q ) = B (q ) + AT (q )
M (q ) (1)
tems. The integration of a kinematic controller and a torque controller for
the dynamic model of a nonholonomic mobile robot has been presented. In where q 2 Rn is generalized coordinates,  2 Rr is the input vector,
this paper, an adaptive extension of the controller is proposed. If an adap-  2 Rm is the vector of constraint forces, M (q ) 2 Rn2n is a sym-
metric and positive-definite inertia matrix, V (q; q_ ) 2 Rn2n is the
tive tracking controller for the kinematic model with unknown parame-

centripetal and coriolis matrix, G(q ) 2 Rn is the gravitational vector,


ters exists, an adaptive tracking controller for the dynamic model with un-
known parameters can be designed by using an adaptive backstepping ap-
proach. A design example for a mobile robot with two actuated wheels is B (q ) 2 Rn2r is the input transformation matrix, and A(q ) 2 Rm2n
provided. In this design, a new kinematic adaptive controller is proposed, is the matrix associated with the constraints. In the following, we con-
sider the r = n 0 m case.
then a torque adaptive controller is derived by using the kinematic con-
troller.
The kinematic constraints are assumed to be expressed as
Index Terms—Adaptive backstepping, adaptive tracking control,
dynamic model, nonholonomic mobile robot.
A(q )q_ = 0: (2)

I. INTRODUCTION With respect to the dynamics of mobile robot (1), the following prop-
erties are known [10].
A mobile robot is one of the well-known systems with nonholonomic Property 1: M (q ) is a symmetric and positive-definite matrix.
Property 2: There is a parameter vector p0 2 Rl on dynamics that
constraints, and there are many works on its tracking control [1]–[4].
Their objects are mostly kinematic models, but recently one method
satisfies the following equation [11]:
for dynamic models has been proposed [5]. This method integrates a
kinematic controller and a torque controller for the dynamic model of
M (q )v_ + V (q; q_ )v + G(q ) = Y0 (q; q;
_ v; v_ )p0 (3)
a nonholonomic mobile robot by using backstepping [6].
where v 2 Rn and Y0 is an n 2 l0 matrix whose elements consist of
The control input of the controller for the kinematic model is gen-
erally velocity, but it is more realistic that the input is torque. In [5], a
known functions.
Property 3: The matrix M_ 0 2V is skew-symmetric [12], that is,
kinematic controller is designed first so that the tracking error between
a real robot and a reference robot converges to zero, and secondly a
xT (M _ 0 2V )x = 0, 8 x 2 Rn .
torque controller is designed by using backstepping so that the veloc-
The nonholonomic mobile robot (1) is transformed to and divided
ities of a mobile robot converge to the desired velocities, which are
into the following two equations [5]:
given by the kinematic controller designed at the first step.
In this paper, we present a method to design an adaptive tracking
q_ = S (q ) (t) (4)
controller for the dynamic model of a nonholonomic mobile robot with
unknown parameters by adaptive backstepping. The adaptive control M (q )_ + V (q; q_ ) + G(q ) = B (q ) (5)

where S (q ) 2 Rn2(n0m) spans the null space of A(q ) and a full-rank


methods [7], [8] proposed so far for nonholonomic mobile robots do
not consider the model with unknown parameters in its kinematic part,
matrix formed by a set of smooth and linearly independent vector fields,
 2 Rn0m , M = S T M S , V = S T (M S_ + V S ), G = S T G, and
but our method considers the case. We show that there exists an adap-
tive tracking controller for the dynamic model with unknown param-
eters if it is possible to design an adaptive tracking controller for the B = S T B . The system (4) represents the kinematics of a mobile robot.
kinematic model with unknown parameters. For an example, we de- The following properties are derived from the previously described
sign an adaptive tracking controller of a mobile robot with two actuated Properties 1–3 [5], [13].
wheels. First, we present an adaptive tracking controller for the kine- Property 1′: M (q ) is a symmetric and positive-definite matrix.
matic model modifying the existing method [9]. Secondly, our main Property 2′: There is a parametric vector p1 2 Rl on dynamics
theorem is applied to the dynamic model by using the kinematic adap- that satisfies
tive controller and we get a torque controller.
M (q )_ + V (q; q_ ) + G(q ) = Y1 (q; q;
_ ; _ )p1 (6)

where Y1 is (n 0 m) 2 l1 matrix whose elements consist of known


functions.
Property 3′: The matrix M _
0 2V is skew-symmetric.
In (6), p1 includes only the parameters on dynamics, not kinematics.
Manuscript received May 28, 1999; revised November 15, 1999. This paper The parameters on kinematics are included in Y1 . Now, we assume the
was recommended for publication by Associate Editor J. Laumond and Editor structure of the parameters on kinematics.
A. De Luca upon evaluation of the reviewers’ comments. This paper was pre- Assumption II.1: Some parameters in the kinematic part (4) of a
sented in part at the International Symposium on Intelligent Robotic Systems, mobile robot appear as following:
Bangalore, India, January 1998.
T. Fukao and N. Adachi are with the Department of Systems Science, Grad- n0m n0m l
uate School of Informatics, Kyoto University, Kyoto 606-8501, Japan (e-mail:
fukao@sys.i.kyoto-u.ac.jp). q_ = S (q; ) = si (q; i )i = (i0 (q ) + ij ij (q ))i
H. Nakagawa is with Sumitomo Electric Industries, Osaka 554-0024, Japan. i=1 i=1 j =1
Publisher Item Identifier S 1042-296X(00)08352-X. (7)

1042–296X/00$10.00 © 2000 IEEE


610 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ROBOTICS AND AUTOMATION, VOL. 16, NO. 5, OCTOBER 2000

where we let  = [1 ; . . . ; n0m ], i = [i1 ; . . . ; il ]T , 1  i  technique [6]. The adaptive control technique for the dynamic part (5)
n 0 m are parametric vectors, and ij (q ), 1  i  n 0 m, 0  j  li is based on [10].
are vectors whose elements consist of known functions. Theorem III.1: If Assumptions II.1 and Assumptions III.1–III.3 are
Furthermore, the following Property 2″ is satisfied. satisfied for a nonholonomic mobile robot (1), the following adap-
Property 2″: There is a parametric vector p 2 Rl on kinematics and tive tracking controller (13)–(16) achieves the control objective: q !
dynamics which satisfies qr (t ! 1) and the boundedness of the signals included in V2 , which
is defined in (17).
M (q )_ + V (q; q_) + G(q) = Y (q; q;_ ; _ )p (8)
T
 = B 01 0Kd ~ + Yc p^ 0 @V1 ^
S
where Y is (n 0 m) 2 l matrix whose elements consist of known func-
(13)
@q
tions and p is a parametric vector which is composed of the elements ^_ i
a = Ti (q; qr ; a^); 1ik (14)
of p1 and i . T
_
^i = 3i
@V1
i ~i ; 1in0m (15)
@q
III. ADAPTIVE TRACKING CONTROL OF A NONHOLONOMIC
MOBILE ROBOT 0
p^_ = 0YcT ~ (16)
In [5],  (t) is considered as a control input for the kinematic part where ^ = [^1 ; . . . ; ^n0m ] is the estimate of  , Yc Y (q; q; 
_ c ; _ c ),
(4), and an ideal control input c (t) is designed to track a reference
S^ S (q; ^), ~ =  c = [~ 0 1 ; . . . ; ~n0m ], i = [i1 ; . . . ; il ],
trajectory. Since the real input of the mobile robot (1) is  ,  is designed
to make  (t) 0 c (t) ! 0 as t ! 1 by using backstepping [6]. But if
  0
1 i n m, and Kd , 0, 3i , 1 i n m are symmetric and   0
positive-definite matrices with appropriate dimensions.
there exist some unknown parameters in a mobile robot, that is, S (q )
V2 is defined as
has unknown parameters or p is unknown in (8), we cannot design a
n0m
= V1 + 1 ~T M ~ + 1 p~T 001p~ + 1 ~T 301~
tracking controller according to [5].
In this paper, it is shown that an adaptive tracking controller can be V2 i i i (17)
designed for the dynamic model with unknown parameters if it is pos-
2 2 i=1 2
sible to design an adaptive tracking controller for the kinematic model
with unknown parameters. with p~ = p^ 0 p, ~ = ^ 0  .
Control Objective: Design an adaptive tracking controller for a non- Proof: The derivative of V2 is
holonomic mobile robot (1), in order that
k
V_ 2 = @V1 S (c + ~) + @V1 q_r + @V1
T
lim (q(t) 0 qr (t)) = 0 (9) @q @qr ^i i
i=1 @ a
t!1

where q (t) = Cq (t), C 2 Rs2n and qr (t) 2 Rs is its desired output


+ ~T 1 M_ 0 V ~ + ~T (B 0 V c 0 G 0 M _ c )
2
and differentiable. n0m
Assumption III.1: An adaptive tracking controller + p~T 001p~_ + _
~iT 3i01 ~i
i=1
 = c (q; qr ; a^) k
= @V1 Sc + @V1 q_r + @V1
+ p~T 001p~_
(10)
T
_a^i = Ti (q; qr ; a^); 1ik (11) @q @qr ^i i
i=1 @ a
T n0m
exists for the kinematic model (7), that is, with this controller q ! qr + ~T B 0 Yc p + @V1
S + _
~iT 3i01 ~i
as t ! 1. @q i=1
k
+ p~T 001 p^_ + 0YcT ~
And there exists a positive-definite and radially unbounded function
= @V1 Sc + @V1 q_r + @V1
T
V1 which satisfies @q @qr ^i i
i=1 @ a
k n0m T
V_ 1 (q; qr ; a
~) = @V1
Sc +
@V1
q_r + @V1
T 0 + ~iT 3i01
_
^i 0 3i @V1
i ~i 0 ~T Kd ~
^i i
(12)
@q @qr @q
i=1 @ a i=1
k
@V1 @V1 @V1
and the signals included in this function are bounded, where a ^ is the =
@q
Sc +
@qr
q_r + T
^i i
0 ~T Kd ~ (18)
estimate of an unknown parametric vector a = [a1 ; . . . ; ak ]T , which i=1 @ a
~ = a^ 0 a is the estimated error.
is composed of ij , and a
The general design method of these adaptive tracking controllers where we used the following equation:
which satisfy Assumption III.1 has not been established so far.
Assumption III.2: B (q ) in (5) does not include unknown parameters 0 _ c)
M ~_ = M (_
and is nonsingular. = B 0 V  0 G 0 M _ c
Assumption III.3: @V1 =@q does not include unknown parameters. = B 0 V (~ + c ) 0 G 0 M _ c : (19)

Assumption III.2 is easily relaxed by the existing adaptive control From Assumption III.1, (17), and (18), the signals included in V2
technique, if B is constant and the sign of each elements is known. are bounded. Because ~_ is proved to be bounded, V2 2 L1 . From
Assumption III.3 can be always satisfied by the appropriate selection Barbalat’s lemma [14], [6], we can show  (t) ! c (t) as t ! 1.
of V1 . Therefore, the equation q_ = S = S (~  + c ) = Sc + S ~ shows
Now, we provide the following theorem to design an adaptive q (t) ! qr (t) as t ! 1, since ~ ! 0 as t ! 1 and the kinematic
tracking controller of a mobile robot using adaptive backstepping model of a mobile robot satisfies Assumption III.1
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ROBOTICS AND AUTOMATION, VOL. 16, NO. 5, OCTOBER 2000 611

where
sin  0 cos  0 0 0
A(q ) = cos  sin  b 0r 0 : (25)
cos  sin  0 b 0 0r
Equations (4) and (5) can be written as the following:
q_ = S (q ) (t) (26)
M (q )_ + V (q; q_ ) = B (q ) (27)
where S (q ) is selected as
r r
cos  cos 
2 2
r r
sin  sin 
2 2
r
S (q ) =
2b
0 2rb (28)

1 0
Fig. 1. Mobile robot with two actuated wheels.
0 1

Remark III.1: Because adaptive control is applied to treat unknown and M , V , B are expressed as
r2 r2
(mb 0 I )
parameters in the kinematic part, it is more important to consider the 2 2
2 ( mb + I ) + Iw
4b2
dynamic part properly, that is, our proposed model-based controller M = 4b 2
r r2
(mb 0 I )
is better than a high-gain feedback controller to treat the dynamics. 2 2
2 (mb + I ) + Iw
As is generally known, the adaptive control system designed for the 4b 4b2
2
kinematics may be unstable if there exists the error ~ [15]. r
0 mc d_
2b
V = 2
IV. MOBILE ROBOT WITH TWO ACTUATED WHEELS 0 r2b mc d_ 0
In this section, we consider a mobile robot with two actuated 1 0
wheels as an example which the theorem can be applied to. An B= (29)
0 1
adaptive tracking controller is designed for the kinematic model and
the dynamic model, and some simulation results are provided. and  = [r ; l ]T consists of motors’ torques r and l , which act
on the right and left wheels, respectively, and let m = mc + 2mw ,
A. Model of a Mobile Robot with Two Actuated Wheels I = mc d2 + 2mw b2 +Ic + 2Im .

We consider the mobile robot with two actuated wheels, which is B. Adaptive Control of the Kinematic Model
shown in Fig. 1 [16].
We design an adaptive tracking controller for the kinematic part (26)
With regard to the mobile robot shown in Fig. 1, 2b is the width of
the mobile robot and r is the radius of the wheel. O 0 xy is the world
modifying the method proposed by Kanayama et al. [9].
coordinate system and P0 0 XY is the coordinate system fixed to the
First, we consider  as a control input and construct the adaptive
mobile robot. P0 is the origin of the coordinate system P0 0XY and the
control system for the following kinematic model:
r r
middle between the right and left driving wheels. The center of mass of cos  cos 
x 2 2
the mobile robot is Pc , which is on the X -axis, and the distance from r r
y sin  sin 
P0 to Pc is d. For the later description, mc and mw are the mass of d 2 2 1
 = r r
the body and wheel with a motor, Ic , Iw , and Im are the moment of dt
r 2b
0 2b
2
(30)
inertia of the body about the vertical axis through Pc , the wheel with 1 0
a motor about the wheel axis, and the wheel with a motor about the l
0 1
wheel diameter, respectively.
The configuration of the mobile robot can be described by five gen- where 1 and 2 represent the angular velocities of right and left
eralized coordinates wheels.
We focus on only three states x, y , , except r and l . The relation-
q = [x; y; ; r ; l ]T (20) ship between v , w , and 1 , 2 is the following:
1 b
where (x; y ) are the coordinates of P0 ,  is the heading angle of the 1 r r v
mobile robot, and r ; l are the angles of the right and left driving = (31)
b
wheels.
2 1
r
0 r
w

We assume the wheels roll and do not slip. Then, there exist three where v is the straight line velocity and w is the angular velocity of the
constraints; the velocity of P0 must be in the direction of the axis of mobile robot at the point P0 .
symmetry and the wheels must not slip Substituting (31) for (30), we get the ordinary form of a mobile robot
y_ cos  0 x_ sin  = 0 (21)
with two actuated wheels
x cos  0
x_ cos  + y_ sin  + b_ = r_r (22) d v
y = sin  0 : (32)
x_ cos  + y_ sin  0 b_ = r_l : (23)
dt
 0 1
w

These constraints can be rewritten in the form The various design methods for this system (32) have already been
proposed. Our method is based on the method [9] whose objective is
A(q )q_ = 0 (24) tracking on a reference robot shown in Fig. 2.
612 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ROBOTICS AND AUTOMATION, VOL. 16, NO. 5, OCTOBER 2000

Then, 1 and 2 are chosen as the following:

1 a
^1 a^2 vf
2
=
a
^1 0a^2 wf
(41)

a1 + a~1 a2 + a
~2 vf
:
=
a1 + a~1 0a2 0 a~2 wf
(42)

Therefore

d
e1
a
~1
01
e2 = 1+ vf 0
dt a1
e3 0
e2 vr cos e3
Fig. 2. Reference robot and real robot. a
+ 1+
~2
a2
wf 0e1 + vr sin e3 : (43)
The kinematics of the reference robot is given as
01 wr
xr cos r 0 We define V1 as
d vr
yr = sin r 0 (33)
dt wr 1 2 1 2
r 0 1 V1 = V0 + a
~1 + a
~2 (44)
2 1 a1 2 2 a2
where xr , yr , and r are the configure of the reference robot, and vr ,
wr are its reference inputs. with positive constants 1 , 2 .
We define e1 , e2 , e3 as following: The derivative of V1 is
e1 cos  sin  0 xr 0 x
e_ 3 sin e3 a a~2 _
e2 = 0 sin  cos  0 yr 0 y :
~1 _
(34) V_ 1 = e1 e_ 1 + e2 e_ 2 + + a
^1 + a
^2
K2 1 a1 2 a2
e3 0 0 1 r 0 
a
= e1 0K1 e1 0
~1
e1 , e2 , e3 describe the difference of position and direction of the vf + e2 vr sin e3
a1
reference robot from the real robot. The inputs v , w , which make e1 ,
a sin e3
+ 0K2 e2 vr 0 K3 sin e3 0
~2
e2 , e3 converge to zero, are given by the following [9], [5]: wf
a2 K2
vf = vr cos e3 + K1 e1 a
~1 _ a
~2 _
+ a^1 + a
^2
wf = wr + vr K2 e2 + K3 sin e3 (35) 1 a1 2 a2
a a wf sin e3
a^_ 1 0 1 e1 vf + a^_ 2 0 2
where K1 ; K2 ; K3 are positive constants. ~1 ~2
= V_ 0 + :
We can easily confirm that e1 , e2 , e3 satisfy 1 a1 2 a2 K2

d
e1 01 e2 vr cos e3
(45)
e2 = v 0 + w 0e1 + vr sin e3 : (36)
dt
e3 0 01 wr
Now, the parameter update rules are chosen as

We define V0 as ^_ 1
a = 1 e1 vf

V0
1 2 2
(e1 + e2 ) +
1 0 cos e3 wf sin e3
= (37) ^_ 2
a = 2 + f (^
a2 ) (46)
2 K2 K2
then, the derivative of V0 satisfies the following inequality:
2 where
sin e3
V_ 0 = e1 e_ 1 + e2 e_ 2 + e_ 3
K2
= 0K1 e12 0 K3 sin
K2
e3
 0: 0; a^2 > 
f (^
a2 ) = 2
a^2
0 
(38) 2 (47)
1 (f0 + 1); a^2
If the parameters in kinematics (30), r and b, are unknown, we cannot 
choose the inputs as (35) because of the relationship (31) between v , w with f0 = ( 2 wf sin e3 )=K2 .
and 1 , 2 . Hence, we design an adaptive controller to attain the control Then
objective by using the estimates of r and b.
a wf sin e3
a^_ 2 0 2
By using 1 and 2 , (36) is transformed to ~2
V_ 1 = V_ 0 +
0 2r + 2rb e2 0 2r 0 2rb e2 2 a2 K2
e1 vr cos e3 a
~2
d r r
dt
e2 = 1 0 2b
e1 + 2
2b
e1 + vr sin e3
= V_ 0 +
2 a2
f (^ a2 )
e3
0 2rb r wr ^2 0 a2
a
= V_ 0 + f (^
a2 ): (48)
2b 2 a2
(39)
where we set When a ^2 >  , the second term of the right-hand side of (48) is zero.
When a ^2   , the second term is less than zero because f (^ a2 )  0,
b
^2 0 a2   0 a2  0. Therefore, it is shown that V_ 1  0. Also, from
1
a1 = and a2 = (40) a
r r (43), e_ 1 and e_ 3 are bounded since a
~1 and a~2 are bounded. After all, V1
and it is assumed that we know a positive constant  which satisfies is bounded. Barbalat’s lemma shows that V1 ! 0 as t ! 1, that is,
_
a2   noticing a2 > 0. e1 ! 0 and sin e3 ! 0. Furthermore, (35) and (41) show that 1 and
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ROBOTICS AND AUTOMATION, VOL. 16, NO. 5, OCTOBER 2000 613

2 are bounded. If we want to avoid e3 ! 6 , one sufficient condition


is that the initial value satisfies V1 (0) < (2=K2 ).
From (43), the derivative of e_ 3 is

a _
e3 = 0 1+
~2
a2
w_ f 0 aa^22 wr + w_ r
a
= 0 1+
~2
a2
(w
_ r + v_ r K2 e2 + vr K2 e_ 2 + K3 e_ 3 cos e3 )

_
0 aa^22 wf + w_ r : (49)

Since sin e3 ! 0 as t ! 1, e3 goes to some finite number. Since a ~2 ,


e2 , e_ 2 , e_ 3 , wf are bounded, e3 is bounded if we choose vr , wr , v_ r , w_ r
to be bounded. Barbalat’s lemma shows e_ 3 ! 0 as t ! 1. From the
equation
Fig. 3. Reference inputs v ; w .
a
e_ 3 = 0 1+
~2
a2
(wr + vr K2 e2 + K3 sin e3 ) + wr (50)
@V1 @V1
cos  + sin 
we can show 0(^ a2 =a2 )vr Kr e2 ! 0 if we choose wr ! 0, because d ^21
=
@x @y
~2 (55)
e1 ! 0, sin e3 ! 0 as t ! 1. dt ^22
0 @V1
@
p a^2 > 0.
Finally, we show
where p1 = (r2 =4b2 )(mb2 + I ) + Iw , p2 = (r2 =4b2 )(mb2 0 I ),
^2  ((2 0 2)=2) <  , the following is satisfied:
If a
p3 = (r2 =2b)mc d, and p^1 , p^2 , p^3 are the estimates, and
2
a^_ 2 = f0 + 1 0 a^2 2
(f0 + 1)  f0 + 21 (f02 + 1) @V1
= 0e1 cos  + e2 sin 
@x
@V1
 0: = 0e1 sin  0 e2 cos 
1 2
= (f0 + 1) (51)
2 @y
p @V1
=0
sin e3
From this inequality, we can see a ^2  ((2 0 2)=2) > 0. :
@ K2
Therefore, we can obtain the following theorem.
_
Theorem IV.1: If we choose the control inputs as (41) and the pa- Moreover, ^ is defined by (46) and c is given as (41).
rameter update rules as (46) for the kinematic model (30) of a mobile
robot with unknown parameters r and b, the closed-loop signals are D. Simulation Results
bounded. If we choose the reference inputs such that vr does not go to In this section, we perform a computer simulation on the dynamic
zero and wr goes to zero, that is, the reference path is a straight line,
then x ! xr , y ! yr ,  ! r .
model of a mobile robot by using the adaptive tracking controller which
was designed in the previous section. In this simulation, physical pa-
Remark IV.1: In Theorem IV.1, we assume that wr goes to zero, that rameters and design parameters are a = 2, b = 0:75, d = 0:3, r =
is, if the reference trajectory is not a straight line, the tracking errors 0:15, mc = 30, mw = 1, Ic = 15:625, Iw = 0:005, Im = 0:0025,
do not converge to zero. Recently, we got some results [17], [18] that K1 = K2 = K3 = kd = 5, =  = 5. The initial values of the
resolve this difficulty. estimated parameters are about 1/10—four times the real values.
The reference inputs vr , wr are chosen as following:
C. Adaptive Control of the Dynamic Model
t
0  t < 5: vr = 0:25 1 0 cos
From above sections, the mobile robot with two actuated wheels sat- 5
isfies Assumptions II.1 and Assumptions III.1–III.3. Therefore, we can wr =0
design an adaptive tracking controller for the dynamic model (26) and
(27) from Theorem III.1. According to Theorem III.1, we design an
5  t < 20: vr = 0:5

adaptive controller and perform some simulations. wr =0


t
From Theorem III.1, the adaptive tracking controller for the dynamic 20  t < 25: vr = 0:25 1 + cos
5
model is
_ 2c p^1 wr =0
~1 _ 1c _ 2c 
 = 0kd
~2
+
_ 2c _ 1c 0 _ 1c p^2
p^3
25  t < 30: vr = 0:15 1 0 cos 25t
^11
@V 1
cos  +
@V 1
sin  + ^12
@V1 wr = 0vr =1:5
0 @x @y @
(52) 30  t < 35: vr = 0:15 1 0 cos 25t
@V @V @V
sin  0 ^22
1 1 1
^21 cos  +
@x @y @ wr = vr =1:5
p^1 _ 1c _ 2c t
d
p^2 = 0 _ 2c _ 1c
~1
(53)
35  t < 40: vr = 0:25 1 + cos
5
dt _ 2c 0 _ 1c ~2
p^3  wr =0
@V1
cos  +
@V1
sin  40  t: vr = 0:5
d ^11 @x @y
=  ~1 (54) wr = 0:
dt ^12 @V1
@ Fig. 3 shows the reference inputs.
614 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ROBOTICS AND AUTOMATION, VOL. 16, NO. 5, OCTOBER 2000

Fig. 4. Simulation result x 0 y. ^ ,a


Fig. 7. Estimated parameters a ^ .

Fig. 8. Estimated parameters p^ , p^ , p^ .


Fig. 5. Tracking errors e , e , e .

we designed an adaptive controller of a mobile robot with two actu-


ated wheels and provided some simulation results. In future works, the
class of systems which satisfy Assumption II.1 should be clarified and
the design method of an adaptive tracking controller for the kinematic
model written in Assumption III.1 should be established.

REFERENCES
[1] Y. Kanayama, Y. Kimura, F. Miyazaki, and T. Noguchi, “A stable
tracking control method for a nonholonomic mobile robot,” in Proc.
IEEE/RSJ Int. Workshop Intelligent Robots and Systems, 1991, pp.
1236–1241.
[2] C. Samson and K. Ait-Abderrahim, “Feedback control of a nonholo-
nomic wheeled cart in cartesian space,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf.
Robotics and Automation, 1991, pp. 1136–1141.
[3] Y. Nakamura and S. Savant, “Nonholonomic motion control of an au-
tonomous underwater vehicle,” in Proc. IEEE/RSJ Int. Workshop Intel-
ligent Robots and Systems, 1991, pp. 1254–1259.
Fig. 6. Errors between ideal and real value: ~ , ~ . [4] M. Sampei, T. Tamura, T. Itoh, and M. Nakamichi, “Path tracking control
of trailer-like mobile robot,” in Proc. IEEE/RSJ Int. Workshop Intelligent
Robots and Systems, 1991, pp. 193–198.
The simulation results are shown in Figs. 4–8. From these simulation [5] R. Fierro and F. L. Lewis, “Control of a nonholonomic mobile robot:
results, we can confirm the usefulness of Theorem III.1 and the limi- backstepping kinematics into dynamics,” in Proc. 34th IEEE Conf. De-
tation of Theorem IV.1. The control performance is good when wr is cision Control, 1995, pp. 3805–3810.
close to zero, but the performance becomes bad as wr is far from zero.
[6] M. Krstic, I. Kanellakopoulos, and P. Kokotovic, Nonlinear and Adap-
tive Control Design. New York: Wiley, 1995.
[7] Y. Chang and B. Chen, “Adaptive tracking control design of nonholo-
V. CONCLUSION nomic mechanical systems,” in Proc. 35th IEEE Conf. Decision Control,
1996, pp. 4739–4744.
In this paper, we proposed a design method of an adaptive tracking [8] S. V. Gusev, I. A. Makarov, I. E. Paromtchik, V. A. Yakubovich, and C.
controller for a nonholonomic mobile robot with unknown parame- Laugier, “Adaptive motion control of a nonholonomic vehicle,” in Proc.
1998 IEEE Int. Conf. Robotics and Automation, 1998, pp. 3285–3290.
ters. It was proved that an adaptive tracking controller for the dynamic [9] Y. Kanayama, Y. Kimura, F. Miyazaki, and T. Noguchi, “A stable
model can be designed by using adaptive backstepping if an adaptive tracking control method for an autonomous mobile robot,” in Proc.
tracking controller for the kinematic model exists. As one example, IEEE Int. Conf. Robotics and Automation, 1990, pp. 384–389.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON ROBOTICS AND AUTOMATION, VOL. 16, NO. 5, OCTOBER 2000 615

[10] J. E. Slotine and W. Li, “On the adaptive control of robot manipulators,” obstacles nearby (GNRON). In most of the previous studies, the goal
Int. J. Robot. Res., vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 49–59, 1987. position is set relatively far away from obstacles. In these cases, when
[11] H. Mayeda, K. Osuka, and A. Kanagawa, “A new identification method the robot is near its goal position, the repulsive force due to obstacles
for serial manipulator arm,” in Proc. 9th IFAC World Congress, 1984,
pp. 2429–2434. is negligible, and the robot will be attracted to the goal position by the
[12] S. Arimoto and F. Miyazaki, “Stability and robustness of PID feedback attractive force. However, in many real-life implementations, the goal
control for robot manipulators of sensory capability,” in Robotics Re- position needs to be quite close to an obstacle. In such cases, when the
search, M. Brady and R. P. Paul, Eds. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, robot approaches its goal, it also approaches the obstacle nearby. If
1984, pp. 783–799.
[13] C. Su and Y. Stepanenko, “Robust motion/force control of mechan-
the attractive and repulsive potentials are defined as commonly used
ical systems with classical nonholonomic constraints,” IEEE Trans. [2]–[4], the repulsive force will be much larger than the attractive
Automat. Contr., vol. 39, pp. 609–614, Mar. 1994. force, and the goal position is not the global minimum of the total
[14] W. Li and J. Slotine, Applied Nonlinear Control. Englewood Cliffs, potential. Therefore, the robot cannot reach its goal due to the obstacle
NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1991. nearby.
[15] P. A. Ioannou and J. Sun, Robust Adaptive Control. Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1996. To overcome this problem, the repulsive potential functions for path
[16] N. Sarkar, X. Yun, and V. Kumar, “Control of mechanical systems with planning are modified by taking into account the relative distance be-
rolling constraints: Application to dynamic control of mobile robots,” tween the robot and the goal. The new repulsive potential function en-
Int. J. Robot. Res., vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 55–69, 1994. sures that the total potential has a global minimum at the goal position.
[17] H. Wang, T. Fukao, and N. Adachi, “Adaptive tracking control of
nonholonomic mobile robots: A backstepping approach,” in Proc. 1998
Therefore, the robot will reach the goal finally. Note that we are not
Japan–USA Symp. Flexible Automation, 1998, pp. 1093–1096. trying to tackle the common local minima problems due to obstacles
[18] , “An adaptive tracking control approach for nonholonomic mobile between the robot and the goal. We shall restrict our attention to the
robot,” in Proc. 1999 IFAC World Congress, 1999, pp. 509–515. formulation and solution of the GNRON problem only.
This paper is organized as follows. In Section II, the cause of the
GNRON problem is analyzed after the introduction of the potential
field methods. Section III presents the new repulsive potential func-
tion and its properties. In Section IV, the relationship between scaling
parameters of the potential functions is presented. In Section V, safety
New Potential Functions for Mobile Robot Path Planning issues of the new potential functions are discussed, and a control system
directly making use of the new potentials is also suggested. Simulation
S. S. Ge and Y. J. Cui results are presented in Section VI to show the problems of the conven-
tional potential field method and the effectiveness of the new method.
Abstract—This paper first describes the problem of goals nonreachable
with obstacles nearby when using potential field methods for mobile robot II. POTENTIAL FIELD METHOD AND GNRON PROBLEM
path planning. Then, new repulsive potential functions are presented by
taking the relative distance between the robot and the goal into considera- For simplicity, we assume that the robot is of point mass and moves
tion, which ensures that the goal position is the global minimum of the total in a two-dimensional (2-D) workspace. Its position in the workspace is
potential. denoted by q = [ x y ]T .
Index Terms—GNRON problem, new repulsive potential function, po- Different potential functions have been proposed in the literature.
tential field. The most commonly used attractive potential takes the form [1]–[3]

1
I. INTRODUCTION Uatt (q) = m (q; qgoal ) (1)
2

where  is a positive scaling factor, (q; qgoal ) = kqgoal 0 qk is the


The potential field method has been studied extensively for au-
tonomous mobile robot path planning in the past decade [1]–[16].
The basic concept of the potential field method is to fill the robot’s distance between the robot q and the goal qgoal , and m = 1 or 2.
workspace with an artificial potential field in which the robot is For m = 1, the attractive potential is conic in shape and the resulting
attracted to its goal position and is repulsed away from the obstacles attractive force has constant amplitude except at the goal, where Uatt is
[1]. This method is particularly attractive because of its mathematical singular. For m = 2, the attractive potential is parabolic in shape. The
elegance and simplicity. However, it has some inherent limitations. A corresponding attractive force is then given by the negative gradient of
systematic criticism of the inherent problems based on mathematical the attractive potential

Fatt (q) = 0rUatt (q) = (qgoal 0 q)


analysis was presented in [3], which includes the following: 1) trap
situations due to local minima; 2) no passage between closely (2)
spaced obstacles; 3) oscillations in the presence of obstacles; and 4)
oscillations in narrow passages. Besides the four problems mentioned which converges linearly toward zero as the robot approaches the goal.
above, there exists an additional problem, goals nonreachable with One commonly used repulsive potential function takes the following
form [1]:

Manuscript received August 31, 1999; revised June 15, 2000. This paper 2
was recommended for publication by Associate Editor J. Ponce and Editor
Urep (q) =
1
2

1
01
(q; qobs ) 0
; if (q; qobs )  0
V. Lumelsky upon evaluation of the reviewers’ comments. This paper was
presented in part at the Third Asian Control Conference, Shanghai, China, July 0; if (q; qobs ) > 0
4–7, 2000. (3)
The authors are with the Department of Electrical and Computer En-

where  is a positive scaling factor, (q; qobs ) denotes the minimal


gineering, National University of Singapore, Singapore 117576 (e-mail:
elegesz@nus.edu.sg).
Publisher Item Identifier S 1042-296X(00)09775-5. distance from the robot q to the obstacle, qobs denotes the point on the

1042 296X/00$10.00 © 2000 IEEE

You might also like