Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

Comparative Analysis of ROS-Unity3D and ROS-Gazebo for Mobile Ground Robot Simulation

  • Short Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Intelligent & Robotic Systems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Simulation has proven to be a highly effective tool for validating autonomous systems while lowering cost and increasing safety. Currently, several dedicated simulation environments exist, but they are limited in terms of environment size, visual quality, and feature sets. As a result, many researchers have begun to consider repurposing game engines as simulators to take advantage of their greater flexibility, scalability, and graphical fidelity. This study investigates a robotics simulation environment based on the Unity3D game engine and Robot Operating System (ROS) middleware, collectively referred to as ROS-Unity3D, and compares it to the popular ROS-Gazebo robotics simulation environment. They are compared in terms of their architecture, environment creation process, resource usage, and accuracy while simulating an autonomous ground robot in real-time. Overall, with its variety of supported file types and powerful scripting interface for creating custom functionality, ROS-Unity3D is found to be a viable alternative to ROS-Gazebo. Test results indicate that ROS-Unity3D scales better to larger environments, has higher shadow quality, achieves the same or better visual-based SLAM performance, and is more capable of real-time LiDAR simulation than ROS-Gazebo. As for its advantages over ROS-Unity3D, ROS-Gazebo has a more streamlined interface between ROS and Gazebo, has more existing sensor plugins, and is more computer resource efficient for simulating small environments.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles and news from researchers in related subjects, suggested using machine learning.

Code and Data Availability

Source code and experimental data from the current study is available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

References

  1. Heredia, G., Jimenez-Cano, A.E., Sanchez, I., Llorente, D., Vega, V., Braga, J., Acosta, J.A., Ollero, A.: Control of a multirotor outdoor aerial manipulator. 3417–3422. https://doi.org/10.1109/IROS.2014.6943038 (2014)

  2. Pütz, S., Wiemann, T., Piening, M.K., Hertzberg, J.: Continuous shortest path vector field navigation on 3D triangular meshes for mobile robots. In: 2021 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), pp 2256–2263 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1109/ICRA48506.2021.9560981

  3. Park, J.-H., Uhm, T.-Y., Bae, G.-D., Choi, Y.-H.: Stability evaluation of outdoor unmanned security robot in terrain information. In: 2018 18th International Conference on Control, Automation and Systems (ICCAS), pp 955–957 (2018)

  4. Lee, D., Son, S., Yang, K., Park, J., Lee, H.: Sensor fusion localization system for outdoor mobile robot. In: 2009 ICCAS-SICE, pp 1384–1387 (2009)

  5. Shah, S., Dey, D., Lovett, C., Kapoor, A.: Airsim: High-fidelity visual and physical simulation for autonomous vehicles. In: Hutter, M., Siegwart, R. (eds.) Field and Service Robotics, pp 621–635. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-67361-5_40

  6. Karakaya, S., Kucukyildiz, G., Ocak, H., Ocak, H., Karakaya, S., Kucukyildiz, G., Kucukyildiz, G.: A new mobile robot toolbox for MATLAB. J. Intell. Robot. Syst. 87, 125–140 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/S10846-017-0480-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Santos Pessoa de Melo, M., Gomes da Silva Neto, J., Jorge Lima da Silva, P., Natario Teixeira, J.M.X., Teichrieb, V.: Analysis and comparison of robotics 3D simulators. In: 2019 21st Symposium on Virtual and Augmented Reality (SVR), pp 242–251 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1109/SVR.2019.00049

  8. Allan, M., Wong, U., Furlong, P.M., Rogg, A., McMichael, S., Welsh, T., Chen, I., Peters, S., Gerkey, B., Quigley, M., Shirley, M., Deans, M., Cannon, H., Fong, T.: Planetary rover simulation for lunar exploration missions. In: 2019 IEEE Aerospace Conference, pp 1–19 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1109/AERO.2019.8741780

  9. Giubilato, R., Masili, A., Chiodini, S., Pertile, M., Debei, S.: Simulation framework for mobile robots in planetary-like environments. In: 2020 IEEE 7th International Workshop on Metrology for AeroSpace (MetroAeroSpace), pp 594–599 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1109/MetroAeroSpace48742.2020.9160154

  10. Sevastopoulos, C., Konstantopoulos, S.: A simulated environment for traversability estimation experiments in field robotics applications. In: The 14th PErvasive Technologies Related to Assistive Environments Conference. PETRA 2021, pp 256–257. Association for Computing Machinery, New York (2021). https://doi.org/10.1145/3453892.3462214

  11. Mattingly, W.A., Chang, D.-J., Paris, R., Smith, N., Blevins, J., Ouyang, M.: Robot design using unity for computer games and robotic simulations. In: 2012 17th International Conference on Computer Games (CGAMES), pp 56–59 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1109/CGames.2012.6314552

  12. Yamaura, M., Arechiga, N., Shiraishi, S., Eisele, S., Hite, J., Neema, S., Scott, J., Bapty, T.: ADAS virtual prototyping using modelica and unity co-simulation via OpenMETA. In: The First Japanese Modelica Conferences, May 23-24, Tokyo, Japan, vol. 124, pp 43–49. Linköping University Electronic Press, Sweden (2016). https://doi.org/10.3384/ECP1612443

  13. Niemirepo, T., Toivonen, J., Viitanen, M., Vanne, J.: Open-source cithrus simulation environment for real-time 360-degree traffic imaging. In: 2019 IEEE International Conference on Connected Vehicles and Expo (ICCVE), pp 1–5 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1109/ICCVE45908.2019.8965242

  14. Meng, W., Hu, Y., Lin, J., Lin, F., Teo, R.: ROS+unity: An efficient high-fidelity 3D multi-UAV navigation and control simulator in GPS-denied environments. In: IECON 2015 - 41st Annual Conference of the IEEE Industrial Electronics Society, pp 002562–002567 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1109/IECON.2015.7392488

  15. Codd-Downey, R., Forooshani, P.M., Speers, A., Wang, H., Jenkin, M.: From ROS to unity: Leveraging robot and virtual environment middleware for immersive teleoperation. In: 2014 IEE International Conference on Information and Automation (ICIA), pp 932–936 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1109/ICInfA.2014.6932785

  16. Mizuchi, Y., Inamura, T.: Cloud-based multimodal human-robot interaction simulator utilizing ROS and unity frameworks. In: 2017 IEEE/SICE International Symposium on System Integration (SII), pp 948–955 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1109/SII.2017.8279345

  17. Zhang, Q., Zhao, Y.: Implementation and verification of a virtual testing system based on ROS and unity for computer vision algorithms. In: 2019 12th International Congress on Image and Signal Processing, BioMedical Engineering and Informatics (CISP-BMEI), pp 1–6 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1109/CISP-BMEI48845.2019.8965907

  18. Liu, Y., Novotny, G., Smirnov, N., Morales-Alvarez, W., Olaverri-Monreal, C.: Mobile delivery robots: Mixed reality-based simulation relying on ROS and unity 3D. In: 2020 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV), pp 15–20 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1109/IV47402.2020.9304701

  19. Sita, E., Horváth, C. M., Thomessen, T., Korondi, P., Pipe, A.G.: ROS-unity3D based system for monitoring of an industrial robotic process. In: 2017 IEEE/SICE International Symposium on System Integration (SII), pp 1047–1052 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1109/SII.2017.8279361

  20. Hussein, A., García, F., Olaverri-Monreal, C.: ROS and unity based framework for intelligent vehicles control and simulation. In: 2018 IEEE International Conference on Vehicular Electronics and Safety (ICVES), pp 1–6 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1109/ICVES.2018.8519522

  21. Konrad, A.: Simulation of mobile robots with unity and ROS: A case-study and a comparison with Gazebo. Master’s thesis, University West. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:hv:diva-14019 (2019)

  22. Anand, H., Rees, S.A., Chen, Z., Poruthukaran, A.J., Bearman, S., Prasad Antervedi, L.G., Das, J.: OpenUAV cloud testbed: a collaborative design studio for field robotics. In: 2021 IEEE 17th International Conference on Automation Science and Engineering (CASE), pp 724–731 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1109/CASE49439.2021.9551638

  23. Piyavichayanon, C., Koga, M.: Validation of robot model with mobile augmented reality. In: 2021 6th Asia-Pacific Conference on Intelligent Robot Systems (ACIRS), pp 1–5 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1109/ACIRS52449.2021.9519362

  24. Roldán, J.J., Peña-Tapia, E., Garzón-Ramos, D., de León, J., Garzón, M., del Cerro, J., Barrientos, A. In: Koubaa, A. (ed.) : Multi-robot systems, virtual reality and ROS: Developing a new generation of operator interfaces, pp 29–64. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91590-6_2

  25. Shi, Z., McGhan, C.L.R.: Affordable virtual reality setup for educational aerospace robotics simulation and testing. J. Aerosp. Inf. Syst. 17(1), 66–69 (2020). https://doi.org/10.2514/1.I010723

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. de Jesus, K.J., Kobs, H.J., Cukla, A.R., de Souza Leite Cuadros, M.A., Gamarra, D.F.T.: Comparison of visual SLAM algorithms ORB-SLAM2, RTAB-Map and SPTAM in internal and external environments with ROS. In: 2021 Latin American Robotics Symposium (LARS), 2021 Brazilian Symposium on Robotics (SBR), and 2021 Workshop on Robotics in Education (WRE), pp 216–221 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1109/LARS/SBR/WRE54079.2021.9605432

  27. Sankalprajan, P., Sharma, T., Perur, H.D., Sekhar Pagala, P.: Comparative analysis of ROS based 2D and 3D SLAM algorithms for autonomous ground vehicles. In: 2020 International Conference for Emerging Technology (INCET), pp 1–6 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1109/INCET49848.2020.9154101

  28. Uijt de Haag, M., Huschbeck, S., Berth, C.: Modelling assured navigation of sUAS swarms in urban environments. In: 2021 IEEE/AIAA 40th Digital Avionics Systems Conference (DASC), pp 1–8 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1109/DASC52595.2021.9594465

  29. Pannozzi, P., Valavanis, K.P., Rutherford, M.J., Guglieri, G., Scanavino, M., Quagliotti, F.: Urban monitoring of smart communities using UAS. In: 2019 International Conference on Unmanned Aircraft Systems (ICUAS), pp 866–873 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1109/ICUAS.2019.8798310

  30. Iqbal, A., Thapa, R., Gans, N.R.: Deep reinforcement learning based loop closure detection. J. Intell. Robot. Syst. 106(2), 51 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10846-022-01720-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The authors declare that no funds, grants, or other support were received during the preparation of this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL, USA

    Jonathan Platt & Kenneth Ricks

Authors
  1. Jonathan Platt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kenneth Ricks
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by Jonathan Platt. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Jonathan Platt and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jonathan Platt.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval

This study does not involve human or animal subjects. No ethical approval is required.

Consent to Participate

This study does not involve human subjects. No consent to participate is required.

Consent for Publication

This study does not involve human subjects. No consent to publish is required.

Competing interests

The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Platt, J., Ricks, K. Comparative Analysis of ROS-Unity3D and ROS-Gazebo for Mobile Ground Robot Simulation. J Intell Robot Syst 106, 80 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10846-022-01766-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10846-022-01766-2

Keywords