Professional Documents
Culture Documents
394
ELECO 2011 7th International Conference on Electrical and Electronics Engineering, 1-4 December, Bursa, TURKEY
2. Mathematical Model
2.1 Kinematics Then we can rewrite the Eq. (2) in the form below where
S(q) 3x2 is a matrix and 2 is called as the control input
Kinematics of mobile robot platform is illustrated in Fig. 2. vector at kinematic level defined as
The vehicle configuration vector in global coordinate frames is
q S q (5)
q X
T 3
Y (1)
cos d sin
S q sin , v w
T
where X, Y and θ are the position and orientation of vehicle d cos (6)
respectively. The transformation between the local velocities x
vrrx where r is the wheel radius. Next the equations of robot motion
c vrr in global coordinates follow
vrry
mX FL FR cos f x cos f y sin (11)
395
ELECO 2011 7th International Conference on Electrical and Electronics Engineering, 1-4 December, Bursa, TURKEY
where m is the vehicle’s mass and I is the vehicle’s inertia about 3. Motion Control
z-axis, fx and fy are the rolling and sliding friction forces
respectively and Mr is the resistive moment about z-axis. Motion control of a vehicle is often regarded as trajectory
Rolling friction forces are too small when compared to sliding tracking control. Here we regard it as the motion control system
friction forces in ideal case. A realistic model for rolling friction that has two sub-systems, that is, trajectory tracking controller at
in case of slip can be found, for example in [3]. We define the kinematic level and velocity controller at dynamic level. Such a
friction forces for only front-left wheel as follows control system is illustrated in Fig. 4.
f flx x N fl sgn v flx , f fly y N fl sgn v fly (14) 3.1. Control Problem
M C R Fd BF (20)
T T T
M S MS , C S MS , R S R , Fd S Fd ,
T
T
B S B (21)
Fig. 4. Motion control system
396
ELECO 2011 7th International Conference on Electrical and Electronics Engineering, 1-4 December, Bursa, TURKEY
X c X d cos X cd Xc
Y Y d sin , ec
Y Yc (25)
c cd
cos d sin d , ea T hc
T
S1 d
* T *
u M BF C R
(27) 1
(31)
cos sin u n ( q , , ) (32)
T ea
*
sin cos , a hc (28)
DB
1
Mu C R I w w w (33)
and we define the pushing and orienting control commands. where n [n1 n2]T 2
is the vector of uncertainties and the
control law is
*
vc hc cos ea , wc ho (29)
u d K e (34)
e ev ew , v w
A geometrical VFO tracking scheme for kc=k1=1 is T 2 T 2
(35)
illustrated in Fig. 5. For system in Eq. (5) to track a reference
trajectory in Eq. (22) it is sufficient to drive the vehicle with the
velocity control ηc(t) [vc(t) wc(t)]T. This is guaranteed by the where K 2x2
is a design matrix, e = d - is the velocity
VFO method. The orienting control in Eq. (26) is similar to a error and is the sliding mode control law. Then one can write
PD plus control but the derivative parameter is fixed to one. the velocity error dynamics
Hence adjusting the controller performance is limited to a single
proportional parameter. Here we propose a PID plus multi
parameter orienting control defined as below.
e K e n (36)
vdS1*(θd)
y and we define the sliding surface s [sv sw]T 2
and the
θd
Ycd
COG sliding mode control law as
wd
hc*
s V e ev ew
Actual Posture ec
T
y
(38)
vcS1*(θ)
where v and w are the linear and angular velocity sliding mode
control gains respectively chosen high enough to reject the
X disturbances and uncertainties in the system. It is clear that V is
Xc Xcd 2
zero only for e = 0 and V ≤ 0 for all e so the asymptotic
Fig. 5. VFO trajectory tracking scheme convergence of e to zero is guaranteed.
397
ELECO 2011 7th International Conference on Electrical and Electronics Engineering, 1-4 December, Bursa, TURKEY
4. Simulation 5. Conclusions
A 4WD SSMR is modeled in a 3D realistic environment In this paper we have developed a robust motion control
using MD-ADAMS View, Tire and Road modules. The system which consists of two sub-systems. In kinematic level
controller is implemented with MATLAB-Simulink interface. A VFO trajectory tracking method with orienting and pushing
circular reference trajectory is applied to test various control strategy is used. In dynamic level robustness is achieved by
systems. The reference vehicle starts at location (2.5m, 0m) with using CTM plus SMC technique which fully rejects
yaw angle d(0)=/2rad and moves along a circle with constant disturbances, modeled and unmodeled system dynamics. A PID
speeds. We assigned the vehicle parameters as m=150kg, plus multi parameter orienting control is used instead of single
I=30kgm2, x=0.003, y=0.6, r=0.2m, a=0.2m, b=0.3m, parameter dependent one in the original VFO method. A 4WD
c=0.45m, d=0.05m, the trajectory tracking controller parameters SSMR is designed in CATIAv5, Siemens NX6 and simulated in
kc=1, k1=5, k2=1, k3=1 and the velocity controller gain K=[10 0; MD-ADAMS multi body dynamics engine. Motion control
0 10]. We assigned the sliding mode gains with a formula, systems are implemented in Simulink and interfaced with MD-
w=vcm/I, v=100, w=225. In order to reduce the chattering ADAMS. Simulation results proved the stability and robustness
effects we used low-pass filters, rate limiter and saturation of the motion control system for persistently exciting admissible
blocks for F, v and w. Figure 7 shows the results for VFO and reference trajectories even under heavy parameter uncertainty
CTM while Fig. 8 shows the results for VFO and SMC based conditions. We also achieved a smoother path tracking by using
motion control system. In Fig. 8a trajectory tracking, in Fig. 8b the multi parameter orienting control.
the desired, commanded and actual velocities and in Fig. 8c the
left and right side control forces are shown. Acknowledgement
6 2.5
This study is supported by The Scientific and Technological
Research Council of Turkey under grant number 110E194.
Reference Trajectory ex [m]
Actual Trajectory ey [m]
5 2 et [rad]
4
1.5
3
1 6. References
Y [m]
2
0.5
1
0
0 [1] R. Fierro, F. L. Lewis, “Control of a Nonholonomic Mobile
−1 −0.5 Robot: Backstepping Kinematics into Dynamics,” Journal
−2
−4 −2 0 2 4
−1
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
of Robotic Systems, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 149-163, 1997.
X [m] t [s]
[2] L. Caracciolo, A. De Luca, S. Iannitti, “Trajectory
Fig. 7. VFO and CTM with 30% parameter perturbation Tracking Control of a Four-Wheel Differentially Driven
Mobile Robot,” IEEE Int. Conf. on Robotics and
6 2.5
Automation, Detroit, Michigan, pp. 2632-2638, May 1999.
5
Reference Trajectory
Actual Trajectory
2
ex [m]
ey [m]
et [rad]
[3] J. Yi, D. Song, J. Zhang, Z. Goodwin, “Adaptive Trajectory
4 1.5
Control of Skid-Steered Mobile Robots,” IEEE Int. Conf.
3 1 on Robotics and Automation, Rome, Italy, pp. 2605-2610,
Y [m]
1 0.4
50 50
0 0
398