Robotic Formation Control using Variable Structure

Systems Approach
Q.P. Ha, H.M. Ha and G. Dissanayake
ARC Centre of Excellence for Autonomous Systems
University of Technology, Sydney
PO Box 123 Broadway NSW 2007 AUSTRALIA
Abstract This paper addresses robust control of multiple
mobile robots moving in desired formations. A rigorous control
technique for such an agent-based robotic system may encounter
problems of singularity, parameter sensitivity and inter-robot
collision. Our proposed framework focuses on the enhancement
of robustness as well as collision-free establishment of formations
even in the case of singularity and uncertainties in sensing
information of the reference coordinates by using variable
structure controllers incorporated with a reactive control scheme.
Advantages of the approach are veried in simulation of three
robots moving in a line, a column and a wedge.

I. I NTRODUCTION
The issue of control and coordination for multiple mobile
robots has revolved around two major tasks. First, the robot
platoon must maintain some desired shapes such as a line, a
column or a ring formation. The motivation is that multiple
robots are capable of performing many applications that single
robots cannot. Second, the robots have to simultaneously
avoid collisions between themselves and with obstacles in
the environment. Examples of these applications include box
pushing [10], load transportation [7] and capturing/enclosing
an invader [14].
There exist essentially three approaches in controlling
multiple mobile robot formation, namely: leader-following,
behavior-based and virtual-structure (see, e.g., [3] and references therein). While the virtual structure approach utilizes
centralized controllers, the leader-following and behavioral
approaches often apply decentralized controllers using local information. To deal with collision avoidance, some researchers used optimal motion planing [9], [13], which may
be computationally expensive, while other investigators used
feedback control with reactive schemes [1], [2], [12]. These
feedback controllers come with formal proofs of satisfactory
system performance and formation establishment. One advantage of these schemes is that they can be applied to small,
heterogeneous robots with limited communication range.
In robotic formation control, the problem of collision
between robots in the transient phase remains important,
although has not been explicitly addressed. For the leaderfollowing approach, tracking control of multiple mobile robots
using virtual robots (VR) [8] combined with l-l control [2]
has been proposed in an obstacle-free environment. However,
it is observed that the VR control method does not necessarily
guarantee acceptable collision avoidance between robots in

some cases, particularly in the transient process. Also, there

are limitations on the type of the desired formations.
This paper proposes a robust control approach that can
demonstrate high performance of the whole group of mobile
robots when entering any desired formation while safely
avoid inter-robot collision. Here, the variable structure systems
(VSS) approach (see, e.g., [4]) is applied to generate specic
controls for individual robots, making use of the salient feature
of VSS, which is robustness, or the ability of the system to
operate correctly in the presence of parameter perturbations
and external disturbances. In the presence of an incidence of
collision, reactive control schemes are proposed for selecting
different parameters for l-l control to lead the robots to safe
positions while still ensuring formation establishment.
II. VR T RACKING C ONTROL OVERVIEW
We consider a group of three-wheeled mobile robots, whose
kinematic model is given by

cos i 0
(1)
qi = Bi ui = sin i 0 ui , i = 1, 2, . . . , n;
0
1
T

where qi = [xi , yi , i ] is the state vector, (xi , yi ) is the

position in global frame and i is the orientation; and ui =
T
[vi , i ] is the control input, in which vi is the translational
velocity and wi is the angular velocity, of robot i. In addition,
the robots satisfy non-holonomic velocity constraints, which
consist of the pure-rolling and non-slipping conditions. It is
assumed that
(i) Robots are of the same model and satisfy the nonslipping and pure-rolling constraints.
(ii) The workspace is at and contains no obstacle.
(iii) The leader maintains positive velocity on a smooth
trajectory. Followers are indexed by a distinctive priority
number and also aware of others indices.
(iv) Each robot can extract necessary information via its
communication channels.
Giving the initial position and orientation of the follower
robot and its motion trajectory, the objective is to design for
follower i such that as t , (1) Formation is established,
(2) No collision among robot i and any robot j, and (3) Overall
motion satises the limitation of communication range.

Proceedings of the IEEE Workshop on Distributed Intelligent Systems: Collective Intelligence and Its Applications (DIS06)
0-7695-2589-X/06 $20.00 2006

IEEE

A. Virtual Robot Tracking

A virtual robot (VR), proposed in [8], is used to denote a
hypothetical one, placed in the workplace such that it has r-l
clearances from the follower and has the same orientation with
the leader, as shown in 1.
The geometric relationship between the VR and the follower
robot is as follows,
xvi = xi r sin i + l cos i
yvi = yi + r cos i + l sin i
vi = i ,

(2)

q1

y13
Robot 1

l13
D

q3
l23

Robot 3

y23

q2
Robot 2

where qr = [xr , yr , r ] is the reference state vector, and qi =

[xvi , yvi , vi ] is the state vector of the VR of follower i, i =
1, 2, . . . , n.
The kinematic model of the VR is then,

cos i r cos i l sin i

qvi = sin i r sin i + l cos i ui
0
1


Bvi
ui .
=
(3)
0 1
The idea is to use the VR to track the reference robot so that
the follower will reach the desired position in the formation as
its VR approaches the reference robot. In Figure 1, it is shown
that the VR trajectory converges to that of the reference robot
in an internal shape dened by xe and ye . Details about the
controller design can be found in [8].

Fig. 2.

Notation for l-l control

C. Collision Avoidance
In Fig.3, the required clearance between robots is represented by a circle in broken line, having radius d, while the
circle in solid line covers the whole region corresponding to
the robot itself, centering at the control point, having radius
D. Let (xi , yi ) and (xj , yj ) denote the control points of robot
i and j, then the distance between robot i and j is:

(5)
ij = (xi xj )2 + (yi yj )2 .
One has therefore,
ij
ij

> 2(D + d)
2(D + d)

safe
unsafe.

(6)
(7)

Reference

qr

ye

VR i

xe

Fig. 3.

qi
Follower i

Fig. 1.

VR tracking

B. l-l Control
The aim of this control [2] is to maintain the desired
d
d
and l23
of a robot from its two nearest ones,
distances, l13
which can be represented respectively by robot 3 with respect
to robots 2 and 1 as shown in Figure 2.
The kinematic equations for robot 3 are given as follows,
l13
l23

= v3 cos 1 v1 cos 13 + D3 sin 1

= v3 cos 2 v2 cos 23 + D3 sin 2
= 3 ,

where i = i + i3 3 , (i = 1, 2).

(4)

Collision detection

In VR tracking [8], when collisions are detected, the follower robots with a lower priority should switch to l-l control
to avoid collision with those robots having higher priorities,
while the latter do not have to change their control laws. To
choose the desired distances for l-l control, two situations are
considered, referring to cases when the target is inside an
accessible area of the low priority robot (i.e., the shaded areas
in Figure 4); and when it is outside that area. Denoting T G1
and T G2 respectively the targets of follower 1 and 2, and Px
the point where follower 2 will be led to by using l-l control,
d
d
then depending on each situation, the design of l13
and l23
,
which is equivalent to the design of Px , shall be accomplished
accordingly [8].
III. VSS A PPROACH TO ROBOT T RACKING C ONTROL
The design of VSS with a sliding mode involves the design
of a sliding function S, and of the control inputs in the

Proceedings of the IEEE Workshop on Distributed Intelligent Systems: Collective Intelligence and Its Applications (DIS06)
0-7695-2589-X/06 $20.00 2006

IEEE

Reference

TG2

TG1

TG2

Px
_
R

Follower 1

Fig. 4.

Reference

Follower 2

Taking time-derivative of S:

Follower 1

TG1

uj =

Px
Follower 2

ueq = (CBi )1 CBr ur (CBi )1 Ce,

_
R

or


veq = vr cos e
eq =

u+
j (x) when Sj (x) > 0
u
j (x) when Sj (x) < 0,

(8)

where switching between the control structures takes place

across the sliding surface, dened by Sj (x) = 0, to drive the
system state toward this surface. A general condition for the
sliding mode to exist is:
ST S < 0 .

(9)

S = Qsgn(S) KS ,

(10)

(11)

where denes the radius of a region around the sliding

surface.
A. Sliding Mode Control for VR Tracking
The error model for follower robot i, which incorporates
orientation error, is designed as follows,

xvi
xr
exi
e = yvi yr = eyi , i = 1, 2, . . . , n.
vi
r
i
(12)
The time-derivative of the error model is:



cos i r cos i l sin i
vi
e = sin i r sin i + l cos i
i
0
1



cos r 0
vr
sin r 0
r
0
1
(13)
= Bi ui Br ur .
The sliding function used here is chosen as S = Ce,
where


1 0 |r| sin i
C=
0 1 |r| cos i


sin e +
(17)

ui = ueq + uR ,

(18)

where the second term, the robust control, is derived to meet

the reaching condition. According to the reaching law and the
equivalent control chosen above,one has


S
(19)
uR = (CBi )1 KS + Qsat( ) .
1

B
@

|r| cos i
|r| sin i + l cos i
sin i

|r| sin i +
|r| cos i + l sin i

1
C
A

cos i

1
, (20)
|r| + l

there is no reservation in establishing a line formation (l = 0) as in

VR tracking, as commented in [11].

B. Sliding Mode Control for Orientation Tracking

To achieve both position and orientation tracking, intuitively when
the initial orientation difference between a follower robot and the
reference robot is large, some type of orientation tracking should
take place rst before VR tracking. The orientation error Ris dened
as e = i r . With the sliding function S = e + edt, the
resulting control can be obtained as:
i = r (i r ) 1 sat(

S
) 2 S ,
2

(21)

where , 1 , 2 and are some positive constants.

C. Sliding Mode l-l Control

Consider model (4), by denoting
d

l13
l13
=
and d =
,
d
l23
l23

(22)

one can obtain

v3
v1 cos 13
cos 1 D sin 1

=
cos 2 D sin 2
3
v2 cos 23
(23)
= Bu3 br .
For the error model e = d , with the sliding function S = e, one
can obtain
S = e = Bu3 br d = Bu3 br .

(24)

Using same method in described section III-A, one can derive the
following control,

(14)

ull = B1 (br Hsat(

Proceedings of the IEEE Workshop on Distributed Intelligent Systems: Collective Intelligence and Its Applications (DIS06)

IEEE

(16)

The overall control is then [6]:

where K = diag(Ki ), Q = diag(Qi ), Ki Si > 0, Qi > 0,

can be used. For reduction of the so-called chattering effect,
this reaching law can be modied to:
S
S = Qsat( ) KS ,

|r|(e +sgn(r))
|r|+l
2
sgn(r))
r r (e|r|+l
|r|
vr
|r|+l sin e + |r|+l r .

Notably, since (CBi )1 can be obtained as

To satisfy this, the reaching law [4]:

0-7695-2589-X/06 $20.00 2006

(15)

the equivalent control can be derived as,

Target is outside (left) and inside (right) the accessible area

common form of:

= Ce + Ce
,
= (CBi ui CBr ur Ce)

S
) S) ,
3

(25)

where H contains constant reaching rates and contains proportional

reaching rates.
As it is noted that

1
D sin 2 D sin 1
B1 =
,
(26)
cos 2
cos 1
D sin(2 1 )
the control is undened when sin(2 1 ) = 0 or when the third
robot is found on the line connecting its two leaders.

IV. R EACTIVE C ONTROL S CHEME

The reason that Px is 2(D + d) + D away from the reference robot

rather than 2(D +d) is that here, the distance from the front castor of
the third robot (or follower i) to the control point of its leader (or the
reference robot) is considered instead of the distance between their
control points, or ri . Thus in order to ensure ri to be sufciently
d
large for collision avoidance, l13
is increased by the distance from
the third robots control point to its front castor, which is D. Another
reason is that the distance between follower i and the reference robot
needs to be strictly greater than 2(D+d)+D to enhance a safe margin
for collision avoidance. For these reasons, a small positive amount
d
d
is deliberately augmented to both l13
and l23
.

Applying VR control does not necessarily guarantee that VR will

track the correct orientation of the reference robot. In fact, in the
steady state, the follower robots can have either the same orientation
as the reference robot or an opposite orientation, i.e. 180 away. It is
observed that during the tracking process, the VR rotates and if the
follower goes inside the rectangular region dened by xe and ye , or
initially the follower robot is inside that region, as depicted in Figure
5, then it may collide with the reference robot. Another problem
arising with the design of Px is when collision occurs. Since Px can
only be within the accessible area and T G2 may be outside of that
area, it is not guaranteed that when switching back to VR control,
follower 2 can track T G2 without colliding with follower 1 and this
may happen repeatedly.

qr

xe
VR i

Potential collision with reference robot

To overcome these situations, reactive control schemes are proposed. Firstly, if ei 2 then applying VR tracking may result in
increasing position tracking error in the follower robots. Therefore,
the VSS control will be applied in this case for orientation tracking
until orientation of the controlled follower robot is aligned with the
reference robot.
Secondly, should collision occur between any follower robot i and
the reference robot according to the collision detection criteria given
in [8], l-l control will be used to drive the follower robot away
from possible collision and also heading to the target position so
that collision will most likely not happen after switching back to VR
tracking. Here, a VR for the reference robot (VRR) [5] is dened
as a VR with -r and -l clearances from the reference robot, where
r-l are correspondingly the desired clearances of follower i. This
virtual robot will be placed at the desired position of follower i in
the formation. If a collision occurs between any follower robot and
the reference robot, the follower robot will switch to l-l control in
order to go to Px , as illustrated in Figure 6, by using two leaders:
d
d
the reference robot and the VRR, with l13
and l23
designed as:
d
l13
d
l23

VRR

= 2(D
+ d) + D +

= r2 + l2 2(D + d) D + .

Follower i and reference robot collision avoidance under l-l control

d
l13
d
l23

Fig. 5.

Px

Thirdly, when there is a possible collision between the two

followers, follower 2 (lower priority) shall apply l-l control where
leader 1 plays the role of the follower 1 and leader 2 of the VRR. In
d
d
that case, l13
is the
same as in (27) while l23 is similar to the one in
(27) except that r2 + l2 is replaced by the distance between VRR
and follower 1, or rr1 . Therefore,

Follower i

qi

2(D+d)

Fig. 6.

Reference

ye

Reference
Follower i

(27)

= 2(D + d) + D +
= |rr1 2(D + d) D| + .

However, if target T G2 is in the opposite half plane divided by the

line connecting follower 1 and the reference robot, and the distance
between the reference robot and follower 1 is less than or equal to
4(D + d), then by using (28) it is likely that follower 2 may collide
with both the reference and follower 1 in attempting to go to the
desired position, as depicted in Figure 7. In such situation, l-l control
will be used to drive follower 2 to go behind follower 1. The
specic strategy is also illustrated in Figure 7, where follower 2 is
driven to Px and the line connecting Px and follower 1 is always
perpendicular to the line connecting follower 1 and follower 2. This
is accomplished by setting, in the l-l control framework, leader 1 to
play the role of follower 1, and leader 2 as a VR placed at Px , with
d
d
l13
and l23
dened as follows,
d
l13
d
l23

= 2(D + d) + D +
=.

IEEE

(29)

Lastly, in the case of possible collision of follower 2 with either

the reference robot or follower 1, follower 2 should apply l-l control
to go to a safe position. That position should be at least 2(D+d)+D
away from other robots. For the same reason as previously explained,
d
d
is augmented to l13
and l23
:
d
l13
d
l23

= 2(D + d) + D +
= 2(D + d) + D + .

(30)

V. S IMULATION RESULTS
A. Collision Avoidance
For the case of there is no parameter variations or external
disturbances, initial parameters are set as follows:

Proceedings of the IEEE Workshop on Distributed Intelligent Systems: Collective Intelligence and Its Applications (DIS06)
0-7695-2589-X/06 $20.00 2006

(28)

10
TG2

R
0
y(dm)

Reference

10

F2

F1

20
30
Follower 2

Follower 1
2(D+d)

50

Fig. 8.

20

60

70

80

90

100 110
x(dm)

120

130

140

150

Collision avoidance when establishing column formation

F1

Fig. 7.

y(dm)

Px

Driving follower 2 around follower 1 via rear route

20

- Common : D = 3, d = 1, = 0.3
- Reference : qr (0) = [100, 0, 0]T , ur = [2.5, 0]T
- Follower 1 : Q = diag(0.01, 0.01), K = diag(0.5, 0.5),
= 0.01, = 0.01, 1 = 0.005, 2 = 0.05,
H = diag(0.1, 0.1), = diag(0.6, 0.6).
- Follower 2 : Q = diag(0.01, 0.01), K = diag(0.5, 0.5),
= 0.01, = 0.01, 1 = 0.005, 2 = 0.05
H = diag(0.1, 0.1), = diag(0.6, 0.6).
It is assumed that follower robot 2 has the lowest priority and the
reference robot the highest one. The rst simulation demonstrates
the establishment of a column formation, shown in Figure 8. The
initial positions of the followers and formation parameters are given
as follows,
- Follower 1 : q1 (0) = [70, 10, 0]T , (r, l) = (0, 30),
- Follower 2 : q2 (0) = [50, 15, 0]T , (r, l) = (0, 15).
First, follower F2 had apparently an incident collision with follower F1 near x = 70 and y = 10, when attempting to go to
the desired position. It then applied the method described in (28) to
avoid collision with follower 1. After avoiding potential collision with
follower 1, follower 2 switched the control back to VR control and
went to the desired position for a column formation with reference
robot R.
The second simulation, shown in Figure 9, demonstrates the use
of the method described in Figure 7, in the establishment of a
line formation. The initial positions of the followers and formation
parameters are given as follows,
- Follower 1 : q1 (0) = [80, 20, 0]T , (r, l) = (10, 0),
- Follower 2 : q2 (0) = [90, 30, 0]T , (r, l) = (10, 0).
Follower 2 detected an incident collision with follower 1 near x =
100 and y = 10. It then decided to take the rear route because
follower 1 and the reference were too close, by applying the strategy
described in Figure 7. After a while, follower 2 went to the same side
as its desired position with respect to the line connecting follower 1
and the reference robot. It then applied VR tracking control again,
but potentially resulting in another collision possibility with follower
1 near x = 120 and y = 0. This incident collision was resolved by
applying the method described in Figure 6 to go around the reference
robot. Finally, follower 2 approached the desired position to establish
safely a line formation.

B. Robustness

Motivated by Ogren
and Leonard [12], the issue of uncertainties
in robots coordinates is also taken into account in this simulation.
It is assumed that parameter variations come from communication
channel with the reference robot, or the state vector of the reference
robot contains some sensing error. In other words,
qr = qr + .

(31)

F2
40

Fig. 9.

80

100

120

140
160
x(dm)

IEEE

200

220

Collision avoidance when establishing line formation

where qr is the nominal parameter.

This uncertainty is applied to a two-robot group using respectively
the VR tracking approach and the VSS-based approach. Simulation
results are compared in terms of the tracking error of the follower
robot with respect to the leader. The initial parameters are set as
follows:
- Reference : qr (0) = [100, 0, 0]T , ur = [2.5, 0]T ,
- Follower 1 : q1 (0) = [80, 20, 0]T , (r, l) = (10, 15).
All other parameters are set as previously. For the sake of simulation, the uncertain perturbations in qr are chosen as:
8
< xr = xr + 0.5sin(3t)
yr = yr + 0.5sin(3t)
(32)
:
= r + 0.2sin(3t).
r
The simulation results are shown in Figure 10, 11 and 12. Figure
10 and 11 depict the distances between the reference robot and the
follower robot along x and y axes, respectively. Figure 12 shows
the difference in orientation between them. The upper curve in each
gure shows the result using the I/O feedback approach and the lower
curve shows the result using the proposed approach. The results are
shown from the 100th second to the 200th second to focus on the
steady-state responses.
When reaching the steady state,uctuations occur due to parameter
variations. In Figures 10, 11 and 12, the reference values are
ideally 15, 10 and 0, respectively. It is shown that the magnitude
of uctuations due to parameter variations are smaller with the
proposed approach than with the feedback linearization VR tracking
approach [8] and also the centers of uctuation with the VSSbased approach are closer to the ideal values. This indicates that
the proposed approach is more robust to parameter perturbations in
the state variables of the reference robot.
Using the proposed framework, collision-free movement for a
group of three robots is completely achieved. The new VR tracking
control guarantees accurate tracking of follower robots to desired
positions regardless of initial positions of the platoon while the
combination of VR tracking control and l-l control can be used to
avoid collision between robots. Another advantage comes from the
formation control robustness with respect to parameter perturbations
and external disturbances, which is in fact the salient virtue of VSS.

Proceedings of the IEEE Workshop on Distributed Intelligent Systems: Collective Intelligence and Its Applications (DIS06)
0-7695-2589-X/06 $20.00 2006

180

VI. C ONCLUSION AND D ISCUSSION

16

Ex

15.5
15
14.5
14
100

120

140

160

180

200

160

180

200

Time(sec)
16

Ex

15.5
15
14.5
14
100

120

140
Time(sec)

Fig. 10. Distances from follower robot to the reference robot along X axis
using VR tracking (top) and VSS approach (bottom)

This paper has presented a new approach for controlling multiple

mobile robots (three-robot case) in formation using the leaderfollowing strategy while ensuring collision-free movement. In the
proposed framework, sliding mode controllers are developed for
virtual robot tracking, robot orientation, and l-l control. These
controllers, coupled with a reactive control scheme, are used to
achieve accurate robot tracking, safe establishment and successful
maintenance of robotic formations in the presence of uncertainties in
sensing information. The proposed controllers are proved to overcome
such disadvantages as incorrect convergence of a robotic formation
and potential inter-robot collision. Validity of the reactive control
scheme is illustrated through the establishment of column and line
formations of a group of three robots. Robustness of the tracking
performance is observed in the cases when parameter perturbations
exist in the communication channel associated with the reference
robot. For extension to the multiple robot case, the platoon of robots
may be considered in multiple three-robot groups, where each of the
three-robot groups is treated as an individual unit, with control points
being placed at the reference robots. Then, the proposed technique
can provide a good control framework to avoid collision between the
robot groups in an obstacle-free environment.

R EFERENCES
10.05
Ey

10
9.95
9.9
100

120

140

160

180

200

160

180

200

Time(sec)

10.05
Ey

10
9.95
9.9
100

120

140
Time(sec)

Fig. 11. Distances from follower robot to the reference robot along Y axis
using VR tracking (top) and VSS approach (bottom)

E0

0.05

0.05
100

120

140

160

180

200

160

180

200

Time(sec)

E0

0.05

0.05
100

120

140
Time(sec)

Fig. 12. Orientation difference between follower robot and the reference
robot using VR tracking (top) and VSS approach (bottom)

[1] E. Bicho and S. Monteiro, Formation control of multiple mobile robots: a

nonlinear attractor dynamics approach, Proc. 2003 IEEE/RSJ Intl. Conf.
of Intelligent Robots and Systems, pp. 20162022, Las Vegas, Nevada,
October 2003.
[2] J. P. Desai, J. Ostrowski, and V. Kurma, Controlling formations of multiple mobile robots, Proc.1998 IEEE Intl. Conf. Robotics and Automat.,
pp. 28642869, Leuven, Belgium, May 1998.
[3] B. Erkin, S. Onur, and S. Erol, A review: Pattern formation and
adaptation in multi-robot systems, Robotics Institute - Carnegie Mellon
University, Pittsburgh CMU-RI-TR-03-43, 2003.
[4] W. Gao and J. C. Hung, Variable structure control of nonlinear systems:
A new approach, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electronics, vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 45-55,
February 1993.
[5] H. M. Ha, A. D. Nguyen, and Q. P. Ha, Controlling formations
of multiple mobile robots with inter-robot collision avoidance, Proc.
Australiasian Conf. on Robotics and Automation (ACRA 2005), Sydney,
Australia, December 2005.
[6] Q. P. Ha, D. C. Rye, and H. F. Durrant-Whyte, Robust sliding mode
control with application , Intl. Journal of Control, vol. 72, no. 12, pp.
1087-1096, 1999.
[7] P. Johnson and J. Bay, Distributed control of simulated autonomous
mobile robot collectives in payload transportation, Autonomous Robots,
vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 43-64, 1995.
[8] J. Jongusuk and T. Mita, Tracking control of multiple mobile robots: A
case study of inter-robot collision-free problem, Proc. of the 2001 IEEE
Intl. Conf. Robotics and Automation, pp. 2885-2890, Seoul, Korea, May
2001.
[9] L. Kavraki, P. Svestka, J. C. Latombe, and M. H. Overmars, Probabilitic
roadmaps for path planning in high dimensional conguration space,
IEEE Trans. of Robotics and Automation, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 566-580,
1996.
[10] M. A. Lewis and K. Tan, High precision formation control of mobile
robots using virtual structures, Autonomous Robots, vol. 4, pp. 387-403,
1998.
[11] A. D. Nguyen, Q. P. Ha, and H. T. Nguyen,Virtual-head robot tracking
and three-point l-l control for multiple mobile robots, Proc.IEEE 2006
Workshop on Distributed Intelligent Systems, Prague, Czech Republic,
June 2006.

[12] P. Ogren
and N. E. Leonard, Obstacle avoidance in formation, Proc.
2003 IEEE Intl. Conf. Robotics and Automation, pp. 24922497, Taipei,
Taiwan, September 2003.
[13] J. A. Reeds and L. A. Shepp, Optimal paths for a car that goes both
forwards and backwards, Pacic Journal of Math., vol. 145, no. 2, pp.
367-393, 1990.
[14] H. Yamaguchi, A cooperative hunting behavior by mobile-robot
troops, Intl. Journal of Robotics Research, vol. 18, no. 8, pp. 931-940,
September 1999.

Proceedings of the IEEE Workshop on Distributed Intelligent Systems: Collective Intelligence and Its Applications (DIS06)
0-7695-2589-X/06 $20.00 2006

IEEE