21
1 Toward Autonomous Free-Climbing Robots Tim Bretl Jean-Claude Latombe Stephen Rock CS 326 Presentation Winter 2004 Christopher Allocco Special thanks to Eric Baumgartner, Brett Kennedy, and Hrand Aghazarian at the Planetary Robotics Lab, NASA-JPL

Toward Autonomous Free-Climbing Robots

  • Upload
    pascal

  • View
    33

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Toward Autonomous Free-Climbing Robots. Tim Bretl Jean-Claude Latombe Stephen Rock CS 326 Presentation Winter 2004 Christopher Allocco. Special thanks to Eric Baumgartner, Brett Kennedy, and Hrand Aghazarian at the Planetary Robotics Lab, NASA-JPL. Goal. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Citation preview

Page 1: Toward Autonomous Free-Climbing Robots

1

Toward AutonomousFree-Climbing Robots

Tim BretlJean-Claude Latombe

Stephen Rock

CS 326 Presentation Winter 2004Christopher Allocco

Special thanks to Eric Baumgartner, Brett Kennedy, and Hrand Aghazarian at the Planetary Robotics Lab, NASA-

JPL

Page 2: Toward Autonomous Free-Climbing Robots

2

GoalDevelop integrated control, planning, and sensing capabilities to enable a wide class of multi-limbed robots to climb steep natural terrain.

Page 3: Toward Autonomous Free-Climbing Robots

3

Previous Multi-Limbed Climbing

RobotsEach exploits a specific

surface property

NINJA IIHirose et al, 1991

Neubauer, 1994

Yim, PARC, 2002

Page 4: Toward Autonomous Free-Climbing Robots

4

Non-Gaited MotionGaited Non-Gaited

Non-Gaited Motion implies one-step approach

Page 5: Toward Autonomous Free-Climbing Robots

5

One-Step-Climbing Problem

Given a start configuration of the robot and a hold,compute a path connecting the start configurationto a configuration that places the foot of the free

limbat the hold such that the robot remains in

equilibrium along the entire path.

Page 6: Toward Autonomous Free-Climbing Robots

6

Hold

A hold is defined by a point (xi,yi) and a direction vi .

The reaction force that the hold may exert on the foot spans a cone Fci—the friction cone at i—of half angle less than or equal to pi/2.

Hold

Page 7: Toward Autonomous Free-Climbing Robots

7

EquilibriumFor the robot to be in equilibrium, there must exist reaction forces at the supporting holds whose sum exactly compensates for the gravitational force on the robot.

ˆ f i1ˆ f i2

ˆ f k1ˆ f k2

ri ˆ f i1 ri ˆ f i2 rk ˆ f k1 rk ˆ f k2

0 0

0 0

mg 0

f i1

f i2

fk1

fk 2

xcm

ycm

0

mg

0

Equilibrium

Page 8: Toward Autonomous Free-Climbing Robots

8

Example System

Page 9: Toward Autonomous Free-Climbing Robots

9

Configuration SpaceConfiguration Space

For each combination of knee bends:– Position (xP,yP) of pelvis

– Joint angles (1,2) of free limb

Page 10: Toward Autonomous Free-Climbing Robots

10

Feasible SpaceFeasible Space

1

2

Page 11: Toward Autonomous Free-Climbing Robots

11

1. Simple test for the feasibility of (xp,yp)

xmin/free x p L

xmax/free x p L

where…

x*/free 3x* 2xCM / chain

Feasible SpaceFeasible Space

Page 12: Toward Autonomous Free-Climbing Robots

12

1. Simple test for the feasibility of (xp,yp)

2. Feasible (1,2) varying with (xp,yp), in one half of f

1 cos 1 ˜ x

2 0

where…

˜ x 0.5 * max xmin, free, L min xmax, free ,L

f

Feasible SpaceFeasible Space

Page 13: Toward Autonomous Free-Climbing Robots

13

1. Simple test for the feasibility of (xp,yp)

2. Feasible (1,2), varying with (xp,yp), in one half of f

3. Switching between halves of f

Feasible SpaceFeasible Space

Page 14: Toward Autonomous Free-Climbing Robots

14

Motion PlanningMotion Planning

• Basic Approach (Probabilistic Roadmap)– Sample 4D configuration space– Check equilibrium condition– Check (self-)collision– Check torque limit

• Refined approach– Sample 2D pelvis space, lift to full 4D paths– Narrow passages are found in the 4D space– Does not scale directly to handle DOFs > 2

or constraints such as collision avoidance, joint limits

Page 15: Toward Autonomous Free-Climbing Robots

15

Algorithm 1 One-Step-Climbing1. V {}, E {}2. If qs satisfies the equilibrium test, then add qs to V , else exit with failure.3. (Sample the goal region) Loop N1 times:(a) Sample uniformly at random a combination of knee bends of the contact chain and a pelvis position(xp, yp) within distance 2L from each of the three holds i, k, and g.(b) For each of the corresponding two configurations q where the foot of the free limb is at g, if q satisfiesthe equilibrium test, then add q to V .4. If no vertex was added to V at Step 3, then exit with failure.5. (Sample the feasible space) Loop N2 times:(a) Sample uniformly at random a configuration q 2 Fik. If it satisfies the equilibrium test, then add q to V .(b) For every configuration q0 previously in V that is closer to q than some predefined distance, if the linearpath joining q and q0 satisfies the equilibrium test, then add this path to E.(c) If the connected component containing qs also contains a configuration sampled at Step 3 (goal configuration),then exit with a path.6. Exit with failure.

Basic Algorithm

Page 16: Toward Autonomous Free-Climbing Robots

16

1. Achieve 2=02. Move with 2=03. Switch between

halves of f

4. Move with 2=05. Move to goal

Refined Algorithm

Page 17: Toward Autonomous Free-Climbing Robots

17

Page 18: Toward Autonomous Free-Climbing Robots

18

backstep highstep lieback

Page 19: Toward Autonomous Free-Climbing Robots

19

3-D Four-Limbed Robot

1. The joint limits are such that the inverse kinematics of each limb has at most one solution. Therefore, no decomposition of Cik according to knee bends is needed.2. Sampling configurations of the contact chain is much harder than in the planar case.3. The equilibrium test of Section 3.3 is modified since there are three supporting limbs. The friction cone becomes an n-gonal pyramid.4. Check for both self-collision of the robot and collision with the environment.

Page 20: Toward Autonomous Free-Climbing Robots

20

Page 21: Toward Autonomous Free-Climbing Robots

21

Current WorkCurrent Work

Terrain sensing and hold detection Force control and slippage sensing Uncertainty (hold location, limb

positioning) Motion optimization Extension of feasible space analysis