Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Real-time interception performance evaluation of certain proportional navigation based guidance laws in aerial ground engagement

  • Original Research Paper
  • Published:
Intelligent Service Robotics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Proportional navigation guidance (PNG) law has been established as one of the efficient classes for interception in pursuit-evasion games. Several PNG techniques have been introduced to intercept slow and fast maneuvering targets but a limited study is reported for aerial vehicle interceptor and ground moving target engagement. Further, the interception performance evaluation and comparison of PNG techniques against a high maneuvering target in the air-ground engagement are not reported in the literature. In this paper, four well-known proportional navigation based guidance techniques, namely AAG, AIPNG, Modified AIPNG and ATPNG have been extended to three-dimensions for an unmanned aerial vehicle (quadcopter) to intercept a high maneuvering ground moving vehicle (target). The working environment is kept open and free from obstacles. The quadcopter is treated as an interceptor, while the non-holonomic ground moving robot is considered as a target. In this air-ground engagement, the interception performance of all four PNG techniques is evaluated and compared to each other in terms of the interception time, distance travelled and the trajectory generated by the quadcopter. The results are verified through simulation and hardware experiments. The experimental observations are further validated using statistical student t test. It has been observed in all simulation and real-time experimental results that the ATPNG technique is able to quickly intercept the target without missing the rendezvous point and outperforms the remaining techniques.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Pinkam N, Newaz AR, Jeong S, Chong NY (2019) Rapid coverage of regions of interest for environmental monitoring. Intel Service Robot 12(3):393–406. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11370-019-00290-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Lavaei A, Atashgah MA (2017) Optimal 3D trajectory generation in delivering missions under urban constraints for a flying robot. Intel Service Robot 10(3):241–256. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11370-017-0225-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Berrahal S, Kim JH, Rekhis S, Boudriga N, Wilkins D, Acevedo J (2016) Border surveillance monitoring using quadcopter UAV-aided wireless sensor networks. J Comm Software Sys 12(1):67–82. https://doi.org/10.24138/jcomss.v12i1.92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Trujillo JC, Munguia R, Velazquez ER, Toledo BC (2019) A cooperative aerial robotic approach for tracking and estimating the 3D position of a moving object by using pseudo-stereo vision. J Int Robot Sys 96(2):297–313. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10846-019-00981-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Belbachir A, Gustave J, Muhammad N, Zelinka I (2021) Toward an exploration-based probabilistic reasoning for a quadrotor. Intel Service Robot 14(4):563–570. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11370-021-00378-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Nguyen HV, Chesser M, Koh LP, Rezatofighi SH, Ranasinghe DC (2019) TrackerBots: Autonomous unmanned aerial vehicle for real-time localization and tracking of multiple radio-tagged animals. J Field Robot 36(3):617–635. https://doi.org/10.1002/rob.21857

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Li S, & Yeung DY (2017) Visual object tracking for unmanned aerial vehicles: A benchmark and new motion models. In Proceedings of the Thirty-First AAAI Conf Arti Intel, San Francisco, USA, pp 4140–4146

  8. Zhou X, Liu S, Pavlakos G, Kumar V, & Daniilidis K (2018) Human motion capture using a drone. In IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Brisbane, Australia, pp 2027–2033. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICRA.2018.8462830

  9. Baikov DV, Pastushkova AA, Danshin VV, Chepin EV (2017) Simulation of a group of rangefinders adapted to alterations of measurement angle. AIP Conf Proc 1797(1):030002. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4972441

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Chen X, Phang SK, & Chen BM (2017) System integration of a vision-guided UAV for autonomous tracking on moving platform in low illumination condition. In Proceedings ION Pacific PNT 2017 Conference, Honolulu, Hawaii, USA, pp 1082–1092. https://doi.org/10.33012/2017.15022 

  11. Bloise N, Capello E, Dentis M, Punta E (2017) Obstacle avoidance with potential field applied to a rendezvous maneuver. App Sci 7(10):1–16. https://doi.org/10.3390/app7101042

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Woods AC, & La HM (2015) Dynamic target tracking and obstacle avoidance using a drone. In Advances in Visual Computing–11th International Symposium on Visual Computing, Las Vegas, NV, USA, pp 857–866. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-27857-5_76.

  13. Steiner JA, He X, Bourne JR, Leang KK (2019) Open-sector rapid-reactive collision avoidance: Application in aerial robot navigation through outdoor unstructured environments. Robot Auto Sys 112:211–220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.robot.2018.11.016

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Meng X, Sun B, & Zhu D (2021) Harbour protection: moving invasion target interception for multi-AUV based on prediction planning interception method. Ocean Engineering, 219, 1–8 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00298018/219/supp/C, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2020.108268

  15. Rosas UO, Picos K, Montiel O (2019) Hybrid path planning algorithm based on membrane pseudo-bacterial potential field for autonomous mobile robots. IEEE Access 7:156787–156803. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2949835

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Rosas UO, Montiel O, Sepulveda R (2019) Mobile robot path planning using membrane evolutionary artificial potential field. Appl Soft Comput 77:236–251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2019.01.036

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Guo Y, Qin H, Xu B, Han Y, Fan QY, Zhang P (2019) Composite learning adaptive sliding mode control for AUV target tracking. Neurocomputing 351:180–186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neucom.2019.03.033

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Ayedi D, Boujelben M, Rekik C (2018) Hybrid type-2 fuzzy-sliding mode controller for navigation of mobile robot in an environment containing a dynamic target. J Robot 2018(2):1–10. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/8421848

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. Verma K, Kumar A, Ghosh D (2018) Robust stabilised visual tracker for vehicle tracking. Defence Sci J 68(3):307–315. https://doi.org/10.14429/dsj.68.12209

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Tony LA, Jana S, Bhise A et al. (2020) Vision based target interception using aerial manipulation. In MBZIRC Symposium, ADNEC, Abu Dhabi, arXiv:2009.13066v1

  21. Liu X, Yang Y, Ma C, Li J, Zhang S (2020) Real-time visual tracking of moving targets using a low-cost unmanned aerial vehicle with a 3-Axis stabilized gimbal system. Appl Sci 10(15):5064. https://doi.org/10.3390/app10155064

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Boudjit K, & Larbes C (2016) Detection and target tracking with a quadrotor using fuzzy logic. In 8th International Conference on Modelling, Identification and Control, Algiers, Algeria, pp 127–132

  23. Alshaer JJ (2016) Mobile object-tracking approach using a combination of fuzzy logic and neural networks. Global J Comp Sci Tech 15(8):19–25

    Google Scholar 

  24. Zhang Z, & Peng H (2019) Deeper and wider siamese networks for real-time visual tracking. In The IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Long Beach, CA, USA, pp 4591–4600 https://doi.org/10.1109/CVPR.2019.00472

  25. Ye DH, Li J, Chen Q, Wachs J, Bouman C (2018) Deep learning for moving object detection and tracking from a single camera in unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). Imaging Multimedia Anal Web Mobile World 466:461–471. https://doi.org/10.2352/ISSN.2470-1173.2018.10.IMAWM-466

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Ghose D (1994) True proportional navigation with maneuvering target. IEEE Trans Aero Elec Sys 30(1):229–237. https://doi.org/10.1109/7.250423

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  27. Yang CD, Yang CC (1997) Optimal pure proportional navigation for maneuvering targets. IEEE Trans Aero Elec Sys 33(3):949–957. https://doi.org/10.1109/7.599315

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Mehrandezh M, Sela MN, Fenton RG, Benhabib B (1999) Robotic interception of moving objects using ideal proportional navigation guidance technique. Robot Auto Sys 28(4):295–310. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8890(99)00044-5

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  29. Mehrandezh M, Sela MN, Fenton RG, Benhabib B (2000) Robotic interception of moving objects using an augmented ideal proportional navigation guidance technique. IEEE Trans Sys, Man Cyber, Part A: Sys Human 30(3):238–250. https://doi.org/10.1109/3468.844351

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  30. Wang Q, Zhang L, Bertinetto L, Hu W, & Torr PHS (2019) Fast online object tracking and segmentation: A unifying approach. In The IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Long Beach, CA, USA, pp 1328–1338. https://doi.org/10.1109/CVPR.2019.00142

  31. Keshmiri M, & Keshmiri M (2010) Performance comparison of various navigation guidance methods in interception of a moving object by a serial manipulator considering its kinematic and dynamic limits. In Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Methods and Models in Automation and Robotics, Miedzyzdroje, Poland, pp 212–217 https://doi.org/10.1109/MMAR.2010.5587234

  32. Song Y, Chen W, Yin X (2012) A new angular acceleration guidance law with estimation approach based on sliding mode observer against high maneuvering target. Appl Mech Mater 110–116:5249–5256. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.110-116.5249

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Kumar A, & Ojha A (2013) Performance evaluation of certain proportional navigation guidance schemes. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Control, Automation, Robotics and Embedded Systems, Jabalpur, India, pp 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1109/CARE.2013.6733766

  34. Kumar A, Ojha A, Padhy PK (2017) Anticipated trajectory based proportional navigation guidance scheme for intercepting high maneuvering targets. Int J Cont, Auto Sys 15(3):1351–1361. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12555-015-0166-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Kumar A, Ojha A (2019) Experimental evaluation of certain pursuit and evasion schemes for wheeled mobile robots. Int J Auto Comp 16(4):491–510. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11633-018-1151-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Li Y, Yan L, Zhao J, Liu F, Wang T (2014) Combined proportional navigation law for interception of high-speed targets. Defence Technol 10(3):298–303. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dt.2014.07.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Yan L, Zhao J, Shen H, Li Y (2014) Biased retro-proportional navigation law for interception of high-speed targets with angular constraint. Defence Technol 10(1):60–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dt.2013.12.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Xu X, Liang Y (2015) Biased optimal guidance law with specified velocity rendezvous angle constraint. Aeronautical J 119(1220):1287–1299. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0001924000011258

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Yang Z, Wang H, Lin D (2016) Time-varying biased proportional guidance with seeker’s field-of-view limit. Int J Aerospace Eng 2016(3):1–11. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/9272019

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Pang W, Xie X, Sun T (2017) Improved bias proportional navigation with multiple constraints for guide ammunition. J Sys Eng Elec 28(6):1193–1202. https://doi.org/10.21629/JSEE.2017.06.17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Weiss H, Rusnak I, & Hexner G (2018) Adaptive proportional navigation guidance. In Proceedings of the 58th Israel Annual Conference on Aerospace Sciences, Tel-Aviv & Haifa, Israel, pp 365–393

  42. Saleem A, & Ratnoo A (2018) Two stage proportional navigation guidance law for impact time control. Indian Control Conference, Kanpur, India, pp 312–317. https://doi.org/10.1109/INDIANCC.2018.8307997

  43. Chen Y, Wang J, Wang C, Shan J, Xin M (2019) A modified cooperative proportional navigation guidance law. J Franklin Inst 356(11):5692–5705. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfranklin.2019.04.013

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  44. Wang W, Song X (2019) Nonlinear augmented proportional navigation for midrange rendezvous guidance and performance assessment. Int J Aero Eng 2019(1):1–10. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/1725629

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Sun G, Wen Q, Xu Z, Xia Q (2020) Impact time control using biased proportional navigation for missiles with varying velocity. Chinese J Aeronautics 33(3):956–964. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cja.2019.11.015

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Chen YW, Chen KY, Fang YL (2021) Aiming point guidance algorithm based on proportional navigation guidance scheme. J Cont Eng Appl Informatics 23(1):72–81

    Google Scholar 

  47. Shin HS, & Li KB (2021) An improvement in three-dimensional pure proportional navigation guidance. IEEE Trans Aero Elect Sys, Early Access https://doi.org/10.1109/TAES.2021.3067656

  48. Zlatanov N (2016) Multirotor aircraft dynamics, simulation and control. Tech Report, IEEE Computer Society

  49. Yuan PJ, Chem JS (1992) Ideal proportional navigation. J Guid, Cont Dyna 15(5):1161–1165. https://doi.org/10.2514/3.20964

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

No financial support for this research.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Computer Science and Engineering, Indian Institute of Information Technology Kota, Jaipur, 302017, India

    Amit Kumar

  2. Computer Science and Engineering, PDPM Indian Institute of Information Technology Design and Manufacturing Jabalpur, Jabalpur, India

    Aparajita Ojha

  3. Computer Science and Engineering, National Institute of Technology, Raipur, 492010, India

    Sonal Yadav

  4. Electronics and Communication Engineering, Indian Institute of Information Technology Kota, Jaipur, 302017, India

    Anupam Kumar

Authors
  1. Amit Kumar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Aparajita Ojha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sonal Yadav
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Anupam Kumar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Amit Kumar.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Author1 declares that he has no conflict of interest. Author2 declares that she has no conflict of interest. Author3 declares that she has no conflict of interest. Author4 declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

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

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kumar, A., Ojha, A., Yadav, S. et al. Real-time interception performance evaluation of certain proportional navigation based guidance laws in aerial ground engagement. Intel Serv Robotics 15, 95–114 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11370-021-00404-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11370-021-00404-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation