Abstract
This paper presents a new approach to guaranteeing collision avoidance with respect to moving obstacles that have constrained dynamics but move unpredictably. Velocity Obstacles have been used previously to plan trajectories that avoid collisions with obstacles under the assumption that the trajectories of the objects are either known or can be accurately predicted ahead of time. However, for real systems this predicted trajectory will typically only be accurate over short time-horizons. To achieve safety over longer time periods, this paper instead considers the set of all reachable points by an obstacle assuming that the dynamics fit the unicycle model, which has known constant forward speed and a maximum turn rate (sometimes called the Dubins car model). This paper extends the Velocity Obstacle formulation by using reachability sets in place of a single “known” trajectory to find matching constraints in velocity space, called Velocity Obstacle Sets. The Velocity Obstacle Set for each obstacle is equivalent to the union of all velocity obstacles corresponding to any dynamically feasible future trajectory, given the obstacle’s current state. This region remains bounded as the time horizon is increased to infinity, and by choosing control inputs that lie outside of these Velocity Obstacle Sets, it is guaranteed that the host agent can always actively avoid collisions with the obstacles, even without knowing their exact future trajectories. Furthermore it is proven that, subject to certain initial conditions, an iterative planner under these constraints guarantees safety for all time. Such an iterative planner is implemented and demonstrated in simulation.
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.References
Bekris, K. E. (2010). Avoiding inevitable collision states: Safety and computational efficiency in replanning with sampling-based algorithms. In Workshop on “guaranteeing safe navigation in dynamic environments”, international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA-10), Anchorage, AK, May 2010.
Borowko, P., Rzymowski, W., & Stachura, A. (1988). Evasion from many pursuers in the simple motion case. Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications, 135(1), 75–80.
Chitsaz, H., & LaValle, S. (2007). Time-optimal paths for a Dubins airplane. In 46th IEEE conference on decision and control (pp. 2379–2384). New York: IEEE.
Chodun, W. (1989). Differential games of evasion with many pursuers. Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications, 142(2), 370–389.
Cockayne, E. J., & Hall, G. W. C. (1975). Plane motion of a particle subject to curvature constraints. SIAM Journal on Control, 13, 197.
Dubins, L. (1957). On curves of minimal length with a constraint on average curvature, and with prescribed initial and terminal positions and tangents. American Journal of Mathematics, 79(3), 497–516.
Fiorini, P., & Shiller, Z. (1998). Motion planning in dynamic environments using velocity obstacles. The International Journal of Robotics Research, 17(7), 760.
Fraichard, T. (2007). A short paper about motion safety. In IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA) (pp. 1140–1145).
Fraichard, T., & Asama, H. (2004). Inevitable collision states—a step towards safer robots? Advanced Robotics, 18(10), 1001–1024.
Frazzoli, E., Dahleh, M., & Feron, E. (2002). Real-time motion planning for agile autonomous vehicles. Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, 25(1), 116–129.
Friachard, T., & Bouraine, S. (2011). Provably safe navigation for mobile robots with limited field-of-views in dynamic environments. In Workshop on “guaranteeing motion safety for robots”, robotics: science and systems conference (RSS-11), Los Angeles, CA, June 2011.
Gal, O., Shiller, Z., & Rimon, E. (2009). Efficient and safe on-line motion planning in dynamic environments. In IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA) (pp. 88–93).
Kuwata, Y., Fiore, G. A., Teo, J., Frazzoli, E., & How, J. P. (2008). Motion planning for urban driving using RRT. In IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems (IROS) (pp. 1681–1686). 22–26 Septembet 2008.
Large, F., Laugier, C., & Shiller, Z. (2005). Navigation among moving obstacles using the NLVO: Principles and applications to intelligent vehicles. Autonomous Robots, 19(2), 159–171.
L’Esperance, B., Kazemi, M., & Gupta, K. (2011). Analyzing safety for mobile robots in partially known dynamic indoor environments. In Workshop on “guaranteeing motion safety for robots” at the robotics: science and systems conference (RSS-11), Los Angeles, CA, June 2011. http://safety2011.inrialpes.fr/.
Mitchell, I., Bayen, A., & Tomlin, C. (2005). A time-dependent Hamilton-Jacobi formulation of reachable sets for continuous dynamic games. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 50(7), 947–957.
Pashkov, A., & Sinitsyn, A. (1995). Construction of the value function in a pursuit-evasion game with three pursuers and one evader. Journal of Applied Mathematics and Mechanics, 59(6), 941–949.
Petti, S., & Fraichard, T. (2005). Safe motion planning in dynamic environments. In IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems (IROS) (pp. 2210–2215). New York: IEEE.
Qu, Z., Wang, J., & Plaisted, C. (2004). A new analytical solution to mobile robot trajectory generation in the presence of moving obstacles. IEEE Transactions on Robotics, 20(6), 978–993.
Rzymowski, W. (1986). Evasion along each trajectory in differential games with many pursuers. Journal of Differential Equations, 62(3), 334–356.
Schouwenaars, T., How, J., & Feron, E. (2004). Receding horizon path planning with implicit safety guarantees. In Proceedings of the 2004 American control conference (Vol. 6, pp. 5576–5581). New York: IEEE.
Shiller, Z., Large, F., & Sekhavat, S. (2005). Motion planning in dynamic environments: Obstacles moving along arbitrary trajectories. In IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (vol. 4, pp. 3716–3721). New York: IEEE.
Sinitsyn, A. V. (1993). Construction of the value function in a game of approach with several pursuers. Journal of Applied Mathematics and Mechanics, 57(1), 59–65.
Tomlin, C., Pappas, G., & Sastry, S. (1998). Conflict resolution for air traffic management: a study in multiagent hybrid systems. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 43, 509–521.
Van Den Berg, J., Ferguson, D., & Kuffner, J. (2006). Anytime path planning and replanning in dynamic environments. In IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA) (pp. 2366–2371).
Van den Berg, J., Lin, M., & Manocha, D. (2008). Reciprocal velocity obstacles for real-time multi-agent navigation. In IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA) (pp. 1928–1935).
Vatcha, R., & Xiao, J. (2009). Perceiving guaranteed continuously collision-free robot trajectories in an unknown and unpredictable environment. In IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems (IROS) (pp. 1433–1438). New York: IEEE.
Vendittelli, M., Laumond, J., & Nissoux, C. (1999). Obstacle distance for car-like robots. IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation, 15(4), 678–691.
Wilkie, D., van den Berg, J., & Manocha, D. (2009). Generalized velocity obstacles. In IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems (IROS) (pp. 5573–5578). New York: IEEE.
Wu, A. (2011). Guaranteed avoidance of unpredictable, dynamically constrained obstacles using velocity obstacle sets. Master’s thesis, MIT Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics, May 2011. Available online at http://acl.mit.edu/papers/WuSM.pdf.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Wu, A., How, J.P. Guaranteed infinite horizon avoidance of unpredictable, dynamically constrained obstacles. Auton Robot 32, 227–242 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10514-011-9266-8
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10514-011-9266-8