PRE-DECISIONAL DRAFT; For planning and discussion purposes only 1 Mars Science Laboratory Rover Trajectory Planning Constrained Global Planning and Path.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Active Contours, Level Sets, and Image Segmentation
Advertisements

Motion Planning for Point Robots CS 659 Kris Hauser.
Nonholonomic Motion Planning: Steering Using Sinusoids R. M. Murray and S. S. Sastry.
On the Optimal Conflict Resolution for Air Traffic Control Dept. Of Electrical Systems and Automation Pisa University Laboratory of Information and Decision.
Sameer Ansari Billy Gallagher Kyel Ok William Sica.
Carnegie Mellon University TRAJECTORY MODIFICATION TECHNIQUES IN COVERAGE PLANNING By - Sanjiban Choudhury (Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur,
Mihail Pivtoraiko 1. Motion Planning The Challenge: Reliable Autonomous Robots 2 NavLab, 1985 Boss, 2007 MER, 2004 Crusher, 2006 ALV, 1988 XUV, 1998 Stanford.
Motion planning, control and obstacle avoidance D. Calisi.
DESIGN OF A GENERIC PATH PATH PLANNING SYSTEM AILAB Path Planning Workgroup.
1 Minimum Ratio Contours For Meshes Andrew Clements Hao Zhang gruvi graphics + usability + visualization.
Sampling and Connection Strategies for PRM Planners Jean-Claude Latombe Computer Science Department Stanford University.
EE631 Cooperating Autonomous Mobile Robots Lecture 5: Collision Avoidance in Dynamic Environments Prof. Yi Guo ECE Dept.
Nonholonomic Multibody Mobile Robots: Controllability and Motion Planning in the Presence of Obstacles (1991) Jerome Barraquand Jean-Claude Latombe.
Situational Planning for the MIT DARPA Challenge Vehicle Thomas Coffee Image Credit: David Moore et al.
Planning Paths for Elastic Objects Under Manipulation Constraints Florent Lamiraux Lydia E. Kavraki Rice University Presented by: Michael Adams.
Search-based Path Planning with Homotopy Class Constraints Subhrajit Bhattacharya Vijay Kumar Maxim Likhachev University of Pennsylvania GRASP L ABORATORY.
CS 326 A: Motion Planning 2 Dynamic Constraints and Optimal Planning.
CS 326A: Motion Planning ai.stanford.edu/~latombe/cs326/2007/index.htm Kinodynamic Planning and Navigation with Movable Obstacles.
Motion Planning for Legged Robots on Varied Terrain Kris Hauser, Timothy Bretl, Jean-Claude Latombe Kensuke Harada, Brian Wilcox Presented By Derek Chan.
Optimizing Schedules for Prioritized Path Planning of Multi-Robot Systems Maren Bennewitz Wolfram Burgard Sebastian Thrun.
Planning with differential constraints for LAGR Paul Vernaza.
Nonholonomic Multibody Mobile Robots: Controllability and Motion Planning in the Presence of Obstacles By Jerome Barraquand and Jean-Claude Latombe Presenter:
CS 326 A: Motion Planning robotics.stanford.edu/~latombe/cs326/2003/index.htm Configuration Space – Basic Path-Planning Methods.
CS 326A: Motion Planning Basic Motion Planning for a Point Robot.
The UNIVERSITY of NORTH CAROLINA at CHAPEL HILL Constraint-Based Motion Planning using Voronoi Diagrams Maxim Garber and Ming C. Lin Department of Computer.
Probabilistic Roadmaps for Path Planning in High-Dimensional Configuration Spaces Kavraki, Svestka, Latombe, Overmars 1996 Presented by Chris Allocco.
Planning and Navigation Where am I going? How do I get there?
Anna Yershova Dept. of Computer Science University of Illinois
Search: Heuristic &Optimal Artificial Intelligence CMSC January 16, 2003.
World space = physical space, contains robots and obstacles Configuration = set of independent parameters that characterizes the position of every point.
Instanton representation of Plebanski gravity Eyo Eyo Ita III Physics Department, US Naval Academy Spanish Relativity Meeting September 10, 2010.
Belief space planning assuming maximum likelihood observations Robert Platt Russ Tedrake, Leslie Kaelbling, Tomas Lozano-Perez Computer Science and Artificial.
© Manfred Huber Autonomous Robots Robot Path Planning.
Planning Near-Optimal Corridors amidst Obstacles Ron Wein Jur P. van den Berg (U. Utrecht) Dan Halperin Athens May 2006.
Robotics Chapter 5 – Path and Trajectory Planning
An Iterated Method to the Dubins Vehicle Travelling Salesman Problem OBJECTIVES Develop an algorithm to compute near optimal solutions to the Travelling.
1 Solving problems by searching This Lecture Chapters 3.1 to 3.4 Next Lecture Chapter 3.5 to 3.7 (Please read lecture topic material before and after each.
Path Planning for a Point Robot
12 November 2009, UT Austin, CS Department Control of Humanoid Robots Luis Sentis, Ph.D. Personal robotics Guidance of gait.
Feedback controller Motion planner Parameterized control policy (PID, LQR, …) One (of many) Integrated Approaches: Gain-Scheduled RRT Core Idea: Basic.
Modeling & Planning Deniz Güven Needle Insertion.
1 Distributed and Optimal Motion Planning for Multiple Mobile Robots Yi Guo and Lynne Parker Center for Engineering Science Advanced Research Computer.
Deterministic Sampling Methods for Spheres and SO(3) Anna Yershova Steven M. LaValle Dept. of Computer Science University of Illinois Urbana, IL, USA.
Introduction to Motion Planning
UNC Chapel Hill M. C. Lin Introduction to Motion Planning Applications Overview of the Problem Basics – Planning for Point Robot –Visibility Graphs –Roadmap.
Administration Feedback on assignment Late Policy
Non-Holonomic Motion Planning. Probabilistic Roadmaps What if omnidirectional motion in C-space is not permitted?
Randomized Kinodynamics Planning Steven M. LaVelle and James J
Autonomous Robots Robot Path Planning (3) © Manfred Huber 2008.
Optimization-Based Cooperative Multi-Robot Target Tracking with Reasoning about Occlusions Karol Hausman, Gregory Kahn, Sachin Patil, Joerg Mueller, Ken.
Planning Under Uncertainty. Sensing error Partial observability Unpredictable dynamics Other agents.
Dynamic Mission Planning for Multiple Mobile Robots Barry Brumitt and Anthony Stentz 26 Oct, 1999 AMRS-99 Class Presentation Brian Chemel.
Vision-Guided Humanoid Footstep Planning for Dynamic Environments P. Michel, J. Chestnutt, J. Kuffner, T. Kanade Carnegie Mellon University – Robotics.
1 Review and Summary We have covered a LOT of material, spending more time and more detail on 2D image segmentation and analysis, but hopefully giving.
Basilio Bona DAUIN – Politecnico di Torino
Randomized KinoDynamic Planning Steven LaValle James Kuffner.
Ocean Observatories Initiative OOI CI Kick-Off Meeting Devils Thumb Ranch, Colorado September 9-11, 2009 Observation Planning and Autonomous Mission Execution.
Vision-Guided Humanoid Footstep Planning for Dynamic Environments
CS 326A: Motion Planning Probabilistic Roadmaps for Path Planning in High-Dimensional Configuration Spaces (1996) L. Kavraki, P. Švestka, J.-C. Latombe,
CS b659: Intelligent Robotics
Path Curvature Sensing Methods for a Car-like Robot
EE631 Cooperating Autonomous Mobile Robots Lecture: Collision Avoidance in Dynamic Environments Prof. Yi Guo ECE Dept.
Locomotion of Wheeled Robots
Robust Belief-based Execution of Manipulation Programs
Sept, 19, 2007 NSH 3211 Hyun Soo Park, Iacopo Gentilini
Solving problems by searching
Sept, 19, 2007 NSH 3211 Hyun Soo Park, Iacopo Gentilini
Chapter 4 . Trajectory planning and Inverse kinematics
Planning.
Solving problems by searching
Presentation transcript:

PRE-DECISIONAL DRAFT; For planning and discussion purposes only 1 Mars Science Laboratory Rover Trajectory Planning Constrained Global Planning and Path Relaxation Mihail Pivtoraiko Robotics Institute Carnegie Mellon University

PRE-DECISIONAL DRAFT; For planning and discussion purposes only 2 Autonomous Navigation The Challenge: Outdoor Autonomous Robots 2 NavLab, 1985 Boss, 2007 MER, 2004 Crusher, 2006 ALV, 1988 XUV, 1998 Stanford Cart, 1979

PRE-DECISIONAL DRAFT; For planning and discussion purposes only 3 3 Introduction Ground-based rover operation –Time-consuming –Costly Rover autonomy –Risky –In development…

PRE-DECISIONAL DRAFT; For planning and discussion purposes only 4 Unstructured Environments 4 Local Global ALV (Daily et al., 1988)

PRE-DECISIONAL DRAFT; For planning and discussion purposes only 5 Unstructured and Unknown 5 Local Global ALV (Daily et al., 1988) ?

PRE-DECISIONAL DRAFT; For planning and discussion purposes only 6 Unstructured and Unknown 6 Local Global ALV (Daily et al., 1988) ?

PRE-DECISIONAL DRAFT; For planning and discussion purposes only 7 Unstructured and Unknown 7 Local Global D*/Smarty (Stentz & Hebert, 1994) Ranger (Kelly, 1995) Morphin (Simmons et al., 1996) Gestalt (Goldberg, Maimone & Matthies, 2002) Dynamic replanning D* (Stentz ’94, others)

PRE-DECISIONAL DRAFT; For planning and discussion purposes only 8 Outline Introduction Global planning –Representation limitations –Improvements –Results Local planning –Representation limitations –Improvements –Results Summary 8

PRE-DECISIONAL DRAFT; For planning and discussion purposes only 9 Unstructured and Unknown 9 Local Global D*/Smarty (Stentz & Hebert, 1994) Ranger (Kelly, 1995) Morphin (Simmons et al., 1996) Gestalt (Goldberg, Maimone & Matthies, 2002) Dynamic replanning D* (Stentz ’94, others)

PRE-DECISIONAL DRAFT; For planning and discussion purposes only 10 Unstructured and Unknown 10 Global D*/Smarty (Stentz & Hebert, 1994) Ranger (Kelly, 1995) Morphin (Simmons et al., 1996) Gestalt (Goldberg, Maimone & Matthies, 2002) Dynamic replanning D* (Stentz ’94, others) Local

PRE-DECISIONAL DRAFT; For planning and discussion purposes only 11 Challenges 2D global planners lead to nonconvergence in difficult environments Robot will fail to make the turn into the corridor Global planner must understand the need to swing wide Issues: –Passage missed, or –Point-turn is necessary… Plan Step n Plan Step n+1 Plan Step n+2

PRE-DECISIONAL DRAFT; For planning and discussion purposes only 12 Turn-in-place Difficulties 12 Extremal control –Energy expenditure: High

PRE-DECISIONAL DRAFT; For planning and discussion purposes only 13 Turn-in-place Difficulties Extremal control –Energy expenditure: High Perception difficulties –Sudden view change –Loss of features (e.g. for VO) 13

PRE-DECISIONAL DRAFT; For planning and discussion purposes only 14 Turn-in-place Difficulties Extremal control –Energy expenditure: High Perception difficulties –Sudden view change –Loss of features (e.g. for VO) 14

PRE-DECISIONAL DRAFT; For planning and discussion purposes only 15 Turn-in-Place Difficulties Extremal control –Energy expenditure: High Perception difficulties –Sudden view change –Loss of features (e.g. for VO) Infeasibility 15

PRE-DECISIONAL DRAFT; For planning and discussion purposes only 16 In the Field… 16 PerceptOR/UPI, 2005Rover Navigation, 2008

PRE-DECISIONAL DRAFT; For planning and discussion purposes only 17 Heading-Aware Global Planner Problem: –Mal-informed global planner –Vehicle constraints ignored Heading Proposing: –Satisfying vehicle constraints –Heading-aware planning

PRE-DECISIONAL DRAFT; For planning and discussion purposes only 18 Heading-Aware Global Planner

PRE-DECISIONAL DRAFT; For planning and discussion purposes only 19 Heading-Aware Planning 19 Barraquand & Latombe, 1993 LaValle, 2006   Barraquand & Latombe: - 3 arcs (+ reverse) at  max - Discontinuous curvature - Cost = number of reversals - Dijkstra’s search

PRE-DECISIONAL DRAFT; For planning and discussion purposes only 20 Robot-Fixed Search Space Moves with the robot Dense sampling –Position Symmetric sampling –Heading –Velocity –Steering angle –…–… Tree depth –1: Local/Global –5: Egograph (Lacaze et al, ‘98) –∞: Barraquand & Latombe 20

PRE-DECISIONAL DRAFT; For planning and discussion purposes only 21 World-Fixed Search Space 21 Fixed to the world Dense sampling –(none) Symmetric sampling –Position –Heading –Velocity –Steering angle –…–… Dependency –Boundary value problem Pivtoraiko & Kelly, 2005 Examples of BVP solvers : - Dubins, Reeds & Shepp, Lamiraux & Laumond, Kelly & Nagy, Pancanti et al., Kelly & Howard, 2005

PRE-DECISIONAL DRAFT; For planning and discussion purposes only 22 Robot-Fixed vs. World-Fixed 22 Barraquand & Latombe CONTROL STATECONTROL STATE State Lattice

PRE-DECISIONAL DRAFT; For planning and discussion purposes only 23 Dynamic Re-planning 23 ? State Lattice –Regularity –Position invariance –Enables D*

PRE-DECISIONAL DRAFT; For planning and discussion purposes only 24 Dynamic Re-planning 24 State Lattice –Regularity –Position invariance –Enables D*

PRE-DECISIONAL DRAFT; For planning and discussion purposes only 25 Nonholonomic D* Expanded States Motion Plan Perception Horizon Graphics: Thomas Howard 25

PRE-DECISIONAL DRAFT; For planning and discussion purposes only 26 Nonholonomic D* 26 Pivtoraiko & Kelly, 2007 Graphics: Thomas Howard

PRE-DECISIONAL DRAFT; For planning and discussion purposes only 27 Dynamic Search Space 27

PRE-DECISIONAL DRAFT; For planning and discussion purposes only 28 8-Connected Grid Alternative Space & time complexity –Linear with heading resolution 28 8-connected grid 8-connected state lattice x  y

PRE-DECISIONAL DRAFT; For planning and discussion purposes only 29 8-Connected Grid Alternative Space & time complexity –Linear with heading resolution Optimality –W.r.t. path length –Nearly identity 29 8-connected grid 8-connected state lattice

PRE-DECISIONAL DRAFT; For planning and discussion purposes only 30 8-Connected Grid Alternative Space & time complexity –Linear with heading resolution Optimality –W.r.t. path length –Nearly identity Completeness –Random point-obstacles –Nearly identity 30 8-connected grid 8-connected state lattice Obstacle Density, % Rel. Plan Failure, %

PRE-DECISIONAL DRAFT; For planning and discussion purposes only 31 Outline Introduction Global planning –Representation limitations –Improvements –Results Local planning –Representation limitations –Improvements –Results Summary 31

PRE-DECISIONAL DRAFT; For planning and discussion purposes only 32 Following Global Guidance Local planning –Receding-Horizon MPC Common in rover navigation –Sampling discrete controls –Parameterized representations Natural environments –Pose challenges –“Beat” a set of discrete controls 32

PRE-DECISIONAL DRAFT; For planning and discussion purposes only 33 Following Global Guidance Local planning –Receding-Horizon MPC Common in rover navigation –Sampling discrete controls –Parameterized representations Natural environments –Pose challenges –“Beat” a set of discrete controls 33

PRE-DECISIONAL DRAFT; For planning and discussion purposes only 34 Parameterized Representations Polynomial curvature functions –  (s) =  0 +  1 s +  2 s 2 + … +  n s n –In the limit, represents any motion –By Taylor remainder theorem Constant-curvature arcs –  (s) =  0 –Coupled position and heading –Limited expressiveness First-order clothoids –  (s) =  0 +  1 s –De-coupled position and heading –Simplest such parameterization 34 Kelly & Nagy, 2002

PRE-DECISIONAL DRAFT; For planning and discussion purposes only 35 Arcs vs. Clothoids 35

PRE-DECISIONAL DRAFT; For planning and discussion purposes only 36 Following Global Guidance Local planning –Receding-Horizon MPC Common in rover navigation –Sampling discrete controls –Parameterized representations Natural environments –Pose challenges –“Beat” a set of discrete controls 36

PRE-DECISIONAL DRAFT; For planning and discussion purposes only 37 Path Relaxation Natural optimization problem –Local nature of motion primitives –Parameterization –Available obstacle-aware objective functions Distance transform Obstacle modeling Constrained, Regulated Gradient Descent –Modified gradient descent optimization –Completeness considerations Constraints imposed Regulated step size 37

PRE-DECISIONAL DRAFT; For planning and discussion purposes only 38 Fixed vs. Relaxed 38

PRE-DECISIONAL DRAFT; For planning and discussion purposes only 39 Experimental Results 39 Rover Navigation Experiments Testing Local + Global 150 trials “Random Pose” Experiments Testing Local decoupled from Global 8784 trials

PRE-DECISIONAL DRAFT; For planning and discussion purposes only 40 Outline Introduction Global planning –Representation limitations –Improvements –Results Local planning –Representation limitations –Improvements –Results Summary 40

PRE-DECISIONAL DRAFT; For planning and discussion purposes only 41 Summary Global planning Heading-aware planning Deliberative, intelligent decisions Local planning Expressive clothoids Decoupling heading & position No cost! Relaxation Continuum: arbitrary obstacles Acknowledgement –Jet Propulsion Lab MTP and SURP

PRE-DECISIONAL DRAFT; For planning and discussion purposes only 42 State Lattices for Planning with Dynamics

PRE-DECISIONAL DRAFT; For planning and discussion purposes only 43 Pivtoraiko, Howard, Nesnas & Kelly 43 Backup

PRE-DECISIONAL DRAFT; For planning and discussion purposes only 44 State Lattice Benefits 44 State Lattice –Regularity –Position invariance Pivtoraiko & Kelly, 2005

PRE-DECISIONAL DRAFT; For planning and discussion purposes only 45 Path Swaths 45 Pivtoraiko & Kelly, 2007 State Lattice –Regularity –Position invariance Benefits –Pre-computing path swaths

PRE-DECISIONAL DRAFT; For planning and discussion purposes only 46 World Fixed State Lattice 46 HLUT Pivtoraiko & Kelly, 2005 Knepper & Kelly, 2006 State Lattice –Regularity –Position invariance Benefits –Pre-computing path swaths –Pre-computing heuristics

PRE-DECISIONAL DRAFT; For planning and discussion purposes only 47 World Fixed State Lattice 47 START GOAL State Lattice –Regularity –Position invariance Benefits –Pre-computing path swaths –Pre-computing heuristics –Parallelized search

PRE-DECISIONAL DRAFT; For planning and discussion purposes only 48 World Fixed State Lattice State Lattice –Regularity –Position invariance Benefits –Pre-computing path swaths –Pre-computing heuristics –Parallelized search –Dynamic replanning –Dynamic search space 48 G0G0 G1G1 G3G3 G4G4 G5G5 Search graph  G 0  G 1  …  G n Pivtoraiko & Kelly, 2008

PRE-DECISIONAL DRAFT; For planning and discussion purposes only 49 Dynamic Search Space 49 Pivtoraiko & Kelly, 2008 Graphics: Thomas Howard