Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Iα
Figure 1: System Architecture. L
2
Fa2
L
2
streams. However, due to time restrictions of the Figure 3: Model of the robot.
micro-controller used in the interface, the host com-
puter discretizes the widths into only 128 values, which
provides suÆcient resolution in this case. At the re- as:
ceiver, a circuit extracts the pulses from the carrier, xk = xk 1 + [Vk 1 T + (a1 u1 k d + a2 u2 k d +
and makes them available at each servo port. The
servos have been modied from an output torque of T2
2:5 kgf cm, and speed of 64:8 rpm to a new torque +Fa1 k 1 + Fa2 k 1 ) m cos(k 1 )
of 0:186 kgf cm and the speed of 892 rpm. Wheel yk = yk 1 + [Vk
1 T + (a1 u1 k d + a2 u2 k d +
radius is 1:85 cm, which permits a maximum speed T2
of 172:8 cm/s. Leveling of the robot was achieved +Fa1 k 1 + Fa2 k 1 ) m sin(k 1 )
through two small ball bearings. The robot structure
complies with the restrictions of a 7:5 cm side cube. A T2
k = k 1 + !k 1 T + (a1 u1 k d a2 u2 k d )
cross-section of the robot can be seen in Figure 2. 2I ;
(1)
where xk indicates the value of x at time k T and xk 1
3 Robot Modeling indicates the value of x one sampling interval, T , be-
fore. The terms V and !, are the linear and angular
velocity components of the robot and the Fa1 and Fa2
This section presents the mathematical modeling terms are the friction forces at the contact line between
for the robots. In the diagram shown in Figure 1 it the bearings and the
oor. m represent the robot mass
can be seen that all the information on the robot is and I is the moment of inertia about the robot's cen-
provided by the vision system. The raw information is ter of mass, G. The robot is commanded by the two
processed resulting in speed set points that are trans- signals, u1 and u2 , that represent the magnitude of
mitted by radio to the servos on the robot. The vari- the voltage at the right and left motors, respectively.
ables measured by the vision system are the position, Between the time of the action of these signals and
(x; y), of the geometrical center of the robot and the the visualization of its eects there is a delay time, d.
angle, , between the main axis of the robot and the The model (1) is a physically motivated approxi-
X axis of the playing eld (Figure 3). mate description of the system. One of the problems
Based on Figure 3 and Newton's second law a dy- in the model is that some terms, such as friction forces,
namic model for the robot can be derived and written are diÆcult to obtain. Another relevant problem is
that the velocity terms are not directly measured by
the vision system. This can be circumvented by an
adequate parameterization of the model followed by
consistent parameter estimation. Thus, the physical
model can be rewritten as:
xk = xk 1 + c1 VX k 1 + [c2 u1 k d + c3 u2 k d ] cos(k 1 )
yk = yk 1 + c4 VY k 1 + [c5 u1 k d + c6 u2 k d ] sin(k 1 )
k = k 1 + c7 !k 1 + c8 u1 k d + c9 u2 k d ; (2)
parameters.
input
u1
5
400
position (pixels)
xk 1 xk 2
300 x
VX k 1 =
y
: 200
T 100
form [7]:
2.8
θ (rad)
2.6
2.4
input
0 u1
−5 u 0.6
2
−10 0.4
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
300 0.2
Imag Axis
position (pixels)
x
200 0
y
-0.2
100
-0.4
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
-0.6
20
0 -0.8
θ (rad)
−20 -1
-1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
−40 Real Axis
−60
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
0.4
y (pixels)
-0.2
100
-0.4
-0.6
-0.8 50
-1
-1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Real Axis
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
x(k+d), y(k+d),θ(k+d)
6 Results
Predictor
To prove that the model (5) can be used as a predic-
tor, Figure 9 shows the 10-steps-ahead predictions of
Figure 8: Dead-time compensation based on dynamic the complete model for the robot describing a general
model. trajectory. In this gure, the robot and its working
area are drawn to scale in order to make the errors
easily visible and physically meaningful.
5 Prediction and Delay Compensation Figure 10 shows the control of the robot's orienta-
tion in two situations: with (M) an without (Æ) the
delay compensator. In both situations the orientation
Since dead time is the cause of poor loop perfor- was controlled by a standard digital PI (proportional
mance, there have been various attempts to cancel its + integral) lter. It is easy to note that without the
eect in the control loop. The most famous technique compensation, the transient response of the system is
is the Smith Predictor [5]. The disadvantages of this poor causing the robot to spend a long time to in-
method are that it is restricted to a particular kind of tercept the set-point. In other way, the system with
system and the fact that the disturbance delay is not compensation is faster in spite of the presence of more
compensated. In opposite of the Smith Predictor, the oscillations. The main dierence is that in the second
propose of this article is to use the model previously case (with dead time compensation) the gains of the
identied to predict the position and orientation of controllers can be ne tuned.
the robot and use these prediction as a measurement Even though the results where obtained using a lin-
variables to the controller. This situation is showed ear lter to control the orientation of the robot, it can
in Figure 8. In this gure, the predictor is a recursive be shown that the delay compensation can be used
algorithm that uses the model (5). At the rst interac- in others types of controllers such as nonlinear and
tion, the one-step-prediction is calculated with the real multi-variable, which can also be used to control the
value measured by the vision and the inputs u1 and other variables of the robot as well.
u2 , d steps before. The next iteration calculates the
two-step-prediction based on the one-step-prediction
and the inputs d 1 steps before. The algorithm con- 7 Conclusions
tinues while the present inputs are not used. If d is
very large the prediction d-steps-ahead can be bad. The development of a dynamic model for a single
In this case, to allow the control, the algorithm can small robot which is observed by an external vision
calculate less steps of prediction. system and the use of this model to improve the time
response of the robot was described here. Based on
careful study of the robot's physical characteristics, 1.2
θ (rad)
0.6
[2] Hiroaki Kitano, Minoru Asada, Yasuo Kuniyoshi, [8] I. J. Leontaritis and S. A. Billings, \Input-output
Itsuki Noda, Eiichi Osawa, and Hitoshi Matsub- parametric models for nonlinear systems part I:
ara, \RoboCup { a challenge problem for AI," AI deterministic nonlinear systems," Int. Journal of
Control, vol. 41, no. 2, pp. 303{328, 1985.
Magazine, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 73{85, Spring 1997.
[9] L. A. Aguirre and C. R. F. Jacome, \Cluster anal-
[3] Ashraf Elnagar and Kamal Gupta, \Motion pre- ysis of NARMAX models for signal-dependent
diction of moving objects based on autoregressive systems," IEE Proc. Control Theory and Appli-
model," IEEE Trans. on Systems, Man, and Cy- cations, vol. 145, no. 4, pp. 409{414, 1998.
bernetics | Part A: Systems and Humans, vol.
28, no. 6, pp. 803{810, November 1998. [10] Luis Antonio Aguirre, \A nonlinear correlation
function for selecting the delay time in dynamical
[4] Julio E. Normey-Rico, J. Gomez Ortega, and reconstructions," Physics Letters A, vol. 203, pp.
I. Alcala, \Control predictivo para seguimiento de 88{94, 1995.
caminos en un robot del tipo \synchro-drive"," in
Proc. of XII Brazilian Automatic Control Confer- [11] Benjamin C. Kuo, Automatic Control Systems,
ence, Uberl^andia, MG, Brazil, September 1998, Prentice Hall, 7th edition, 1995.
pp. 611{616.
[5] Gregory K. McMillan,
Tuning and Control Loop
Performance: A Practitioner's Guide, Instru-
ment Society of America, 3th edition, 1994.