Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Behaviors for physical cooperation between robots for mobility improvement

  • Published:
Autonomous Robots Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A team of small, low-cost robots instead of a single large, complex robot is useful in operations such as search and rescue, urban exploration etc. However, performance of such a team is limited due to restricted mobility of the team members. We propose solutions based on physical cooperation among mobile robots to improve the overall mobility. Our focus is on the development of the low level system components. Recognizing that small robots need to overcome discrete obstacles, we develop specific analytical maneuvers to negotiate each obstacle where a maneuver is built from a sequence of fundamental cooperative behaviors. In this paper we present cooperative behaviors that are achieved by interactions among robots via un-actuated links thus avoiding the need for additional actuation.

We analyze the cooperative lift behavior and demonstrate that useful maneuvers such a gap crossing can be built using this behavior. We prove that the requirements on ground friction and wheel torques set fundamental limits for physical cooperation. Using the design guidelines based on static analysis we have developed simple and low cost hardware to illustrate cooperative gap crossing with two robots. We have developed a complete dynamic model of two-robot cooperation which leads to control design. A novel connecting link design is proposed that can change the system configuration with no additional actuators. A decentralized control architecture is designed for the two-robot system, where each robot controls its own state with no information about the state of the other robot thus avoiding the need of continuous communication between the two robots. Simulation and hardware results demonstrate a successful implementation with the gap crossing example. We have analytically proved that robot dynamics can be used to reduce the friction requirements and have demonstrated, with simulations, the implementation of this idea for the cooperative lifting behavior.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • www.packbot.com (2003).

  • Ahlvin, D., & Haley, P. (1992). NATO reference mobility model edition II, NRMM II user’s guide. In Technical Report Number GL-92-19, US Army Waterways Experiment Station, December 1992.

  • Asama, H., Sato, M., Goto, N., Kaetsu, H., Matsumoto, A., & Endo, I. (1996). Mutual transportation of cooperative mobile robots using forklift mechanisms. In Proceedings of IEEE international conference on robotics and automation.

  • Bekker, M. (1960). Off-the-road locomotion; research and development in terramechanics. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bicchi, A. (1993). Force distribution in multiple whole-limb manipulation. In Proceedings of IEEE international conference on robotics and automation.

  • Brown, H., Weghe, V., Bererton, C., & Khosla, P. (2002). Millibot trains for enhanced mobility. IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics, 7, 452–461.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deshpande, A., & Luntz, J. (2003). Decentralized control for a team of physically cooperating robots. In IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems.

  • Deshpande, A., & Luntz, J. (2003). Enhancing mobility of a group of mobile robots via physical co-operation among the robots. In Proceedings of SPIE conference on unmanned ground vehicle technology V.

  • Deshpande, A. D., & Luntz, J. E. (2006). Behaviors for physical cooperation between robots for mobility improvement. In IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems.

  • Fukushima, E. F., Hirose, S., & Hayashi, T. (1998). Basic manipulation considerations for the articulated body mobile robot. In IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems.

  • Gro, R., Bonani, M., Mondada, F., & Dorigo, M. (2006). Autonomous self-assembly in swarm-bots. IEEE Transactions on Robotics, 22, 1115–1128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hirose, S., & Morishima, A. (1990). Design and control of a mobile robot with an articulated body. The International Journal of Robotics Research, 9, 99–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kane, T. (2000). Dynamics online: theory and implementation with AUTOLEV. OnLine Dynamics, Inc., Sunnyvale, CA.

  • Khatib, O., Yokoi, K., Chang, K., Ruspini, D., Holmberg, E., & Casal, A. (1996). Coordination and decentralized cooperation of multiple mobile manipulators. Journal of Robotic Systems, 13, 755–764.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mondada, F., Guignard, A., Bonani, M., Bar, D., Lauria, M., & Floreano, D. (2003). Swarm-bot: From concept to implementation. In Proceedings of the 2003 IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems.

  • Munkeby, S., Jones, D., Bugg, G., & Smith, K. (2002). Applications for the Matilda robotic platform. In Proceedings of SPIE conference on unmanned ground vehicle technology IV.

  • Murphy, R. (2000). Marsupial and shape-shifting robots for urban search and rescue. Intelligent Systems, IEEE, 15, 14–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parker, L. (1998). ALLIANCE: An architecture for fault tolerant multi-robot cooperation. IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation, 14, 220–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pirjanian, P., Leger, C., Mumm, E., Kennedy, B., Garrett, M., Aghazarian, H., Farritor, S., & Schenker, P. (2002). Distributed control for a modular, reconfigurable cliff robot. In Proceedings of IEEE international conference on robotics and automation.

  • Rich, S., Wood, C., & Keller, J. (2000). ODV mobility enhancement using active height control. In Proceedings of SPIE conference on unmanned ground vehicle technology II (Vol. 4024).

  • Sugar, T., & Kumar, V. (2002). Control of cooperating mobile manipulators. IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation, 18, 94–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weisbin, C., Blitch, J., Lavery, J. D., Krotkov, E., Shoemaker, C., Matthies, L., & Rodriguez, G. (1999). Miniature robots for space and military missions. IEEE Robotics and Automation Magazine, 6, 9–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yim, M., Zhang, Y., Roufas, K., Duff, D., & Eldershaw, C. (2003). Connecting and disconnecting for chain self-reconfiguration with polybot. IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics, special issue on Information Technology in Mechatronics, 7, 442–451.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Mechanical Engineering, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA

    Ashish Deshpande & Jonathan Luntz

Authors
  1. Ashish Deshpande
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jonathan Luntz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ashish Deshpande.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Deshpande, A., Luntz, J. Behaviors for physical cooperation between robots for mobility improvement. Auton Robot 23, 259–274 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10514-007-9044-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10514-007-9044-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation