Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-2n9c9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-14T09:19:49.814Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Motion analysis of a spherical mobile robot

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 May 2009

Vrunda A. Joshi and
Ravi N. Banavar
Vrunda A. Joshi
Affiliation:
Systems and Control Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Mumbai 400076, India.
Ravi N. Banavar*
Affiliation:
Systems and Control Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Mumbai 400076, India.
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: banavar@sc.iitb.ac.in
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the 'Save PDF' action button.

A path planning algorithm for a spherical mobile robot rolling on a plane is presented in this paper. The robot is actuated by two internal rotors that are fixed to the shafts of two motors. These are in turn mounted on the spherical shell in mutually orthogonal directions. The system is nonholonomic due to the nonintegrable nature of the rolling constraints. Further, the system cannot be converted into a chained form, and neither is it nilpotent nor differentially flat. So existing techniques of nonholonomic path planning cannot be applied directly to the system. The approach presented here uses simple geometrical notions and provides numerically efficient and intuitive solutions. We also present the dynamic model and derive motor torques for execution of the algorithm. Along the proposed paths, we achieve dynamic decoupling of the variables making the algorithm more suitable for practical applications.

Keywords

Spherical mobile robotNonholonomic systemsPath planning of a mobile robot

Information

Type
Article
Information
Robotica , Volume 27 , Issue 3 , May 2009, pp. 343 - 353
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2008

References

1.Murray, R. M., Li, Z. and Sastry, S. S., A Mathematical Introduction to Robotic Manipulation (CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, 1994).Google Scholar
2.Murray, R. M., Li, Z. and Sastry, S. S., “Nonholonomic motion planning: Steering using sinusoids,” IEEE Trans. Automat. Control 38 (5), 700–713 (1993).Google Scholar
3.Lafferriere, G. and Sussman, H., “A Differential Geometric Approach to Motion Planning,” In: Nonholonomic Motion Planning (Li, Z. and Canny, J. F., eds.) (Kluwer Academic Publishers, New York, 1993) pp. 235–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Fliess, M., Levine, J., Martin, P. and Rouchon, P., “Flatness and defect of nonlinear systems: Introductory theory and examples,” Int. J. Control 61 (6), 1327–1361 (1995).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5.Kiss, B., Levine, J. and Lantos, B., “On motion planning for robotic manipulation with permanent rolling contacts,” Int. J. Rob. Res. 21, 443–461 (May–June 2002).Google Scholar
6.Li, Z. and Canny, J., Nonholonomic Motion Planning (Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, 1993).Google Scholar
7.Ferriere, L., Campion, G. and Raucent, B., “Rollmobs: A new Drive System for Omnimobile Robots,” IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Leuven, Belgium (1998) Vol. 3, pp. 1877–1882.Google Scholar
8.Halme, A., Schonberg, T. and Wang, Y., “Motion Control of a Spherical Mobile Robot,” Proceedings of Advanced Motion Control, Tsu-City, Japan> (1996) Vol. 1, pp. 259–264.Google Scholar
9.Bicchi, A., Balluchi, A., Prattichizzo, D. and Gorelli, A., “Introducing the Spherical: An Experimental Testbed for Research and Teaching in Nonholonomy,” International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Albuquerque, USA (Apr. 1997) Vol. 3, pp. 2620–2625.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10.Mukherjee, R., Minor, M. A. and Pukrushpan, J. T., “Simple Motion Planning Strategies for Spherobot: A Spherical Mobile Robot,” IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, Phoenix, AZ (Dec. 1999) Vol. 3, pp. 2132–2137.Google Scholar
11.Bhattacharya, S. and Agrawal, S. K., “Spherical rolling robot: Design and motion planning studies,” IEEE Trans. Rob. Automat. 16, 835–839 (Dec. 2000).Google Scholar
12.Chemel, B., Mutschler, E. and Schempf, H., “Cyclops: Miniature Robotic Reconnaissance System,” IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Detroit, MI (May 1999) Vol. 3, pp. 2298–2302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13.Michaud, F., deLafontaine, J. and Caron, S., “A Spherical Robot for Planetary Exploration,” International Symposium on Artificial Intelligence, Robotics and Automation in Space, Canadian Space Agency, St-Hubert Qubec (2001).Google Scholar
14.Michaud, F. and Caron, S., “Roball, the rolling robot,” J. Autonom. Rob. 12, 211–222 (Mar. 2002).Google Scholar
15.Michaud, F., Laplante, J. F., Larouche, H., Duquette, A., Caron, S. and Letourneau, D., “Autonomous spherical mobile robot for child development studies,” IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybernet.—Part A: Syst. Humans 35 (4), 471–480 (July 2005).Google Scholar
16.Suomela, J. and Ylikorpi, T., “Ball shaped robots: An historical overview and recent development at TKK,” Field Serv. Rob. 25 (6), 343–354 (2006).Google Scholar
17.Armour, R. H. and Vincent, J. F. V., “Rolling in nature and robotics: A review,” J. Bionic Eng. 3, 195–208 (Dec. 2006).Google Scholar
18.Brockett, R. W. and Dai, L., “Nonholonomic Kinematics and the Role of Elliptic Functions in Constructive Controllability,” In: Nonholonomic Motion Planning (Li, Z. and Canny, J. F., eds.) (Kluwer Academic Publishers, New York, 1993) pp. 1–22.Google Scholar
19.Jurdjevic, V., “The geometry of the plate ball problem,” Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 124 124, 305–328 (1993).Google Scholar
20.Bicchi, A., Prattichizzo, D. and Sastry, S. S., “Planning Motions of Rolling Surfaces,” IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, New Orleans, LA (Dec. 1995) Vol. 3, pp. 2812–2817.Google Scholar
21.Li, Z. and Canny, J., “Motion of two rigid bodies with rolling constraint,” IEEE Trans. Rob. Automat. 6, 62–72 (Feb. 1990).Google Scholar
22.Mukherjee, R., Minor, M. A. and Pukrushpan, J. T., “Motion planning for a spherical mobile robot: Revisiting the classical ball-plate problem,” ASME J. Dyn. Syst., Meas. Control 124, 502–511 (Dec. 2002).Google Scholar
23.Roberson, R. and Schwertassek, R., Dynamics of Multibody Systems (Springer-Verlag, New York, 1988).Google Scholar
24.Singla, P., Mortari, D. and Junkins, J. L., “How to Avoid Singularity for Euler Angle set?,” 2004 Space Flight Mechanics Meeting Conference, Maui, Hawaii Paper AAS 04-190 (Feb. 2004).Google Scholar
25.Bloch, A. M., Nonholonomic Mechanics and Control (Springer-Verlag, New York, 2003).Google Scholar
26.Krishnaprasad, P. S., “Lie-poisson structures, dual-spin spacecraft and asymptotic stability,” J. Nonlinear Anal. Theory, Methods Appl., 9 (10), 1011–1035 (1985).Google Scholar
27.Li, T., Zhang, Y. and Zhang, Y., “Approaches to Motion Planning for a Spherical Robot Based on Differential Geometric Control Theory,” World Congress on Intelligent Control and Automation, Dalian, China (June 2006) pp. 8918–8922.Google Scholar