skip to main content
10.1145/3132446.3134915acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesairConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Autonomous Leader-Follower Architecture of A.R. Drones in GPS Constrained Environments

Published:28 June 2017Publication History

ABSTRACT

In this paper, we present a low cost leader-follower formation control architecture of UAVs. The low cost architecture comprises of two AR. Drones and two Raspberry Pi. The computation of each drones has been done in cost effective Raspberry Pi. The relative localization among the drones has been done using Aruco Marker. A gradient descent based self-tuning PID controller is used by the follower drone to preserve the formation with respect to the leader drone. Experimental results as well as simulation results have shown in this paper.

References

  1. A.K Das, R Fierro, V Kumar, J.P Ostrowski, J Spletzer, and C.J Taylor. 2002. A vision-based formation control framework. IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation 18 (2002), 813--825.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. R. Kurazume, S. Nagata, and S. Hirose. 1992. Cooperative positioning with multiple robots. In Robotics and Automation Conference Proceedings. IEEE, 1250--1257.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. R Kurazume and S Hirose. 2000. An experimental study of a cooperative positioning system. Autonomous Robots 8 (2000), 43--52. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. A. DePriest S. Das O. Falardeau O. Dugas I. Rekleitis, P. Babin and P. Giguere. 2015. Experiments in Quadrotor Formation Flying Using On-Board Relative Localization. In Workshop on Vision-based Control and Navigation of Small, Leigh-weight UAVs. IROS.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. S. Roumeliotis and G. Bekey. 2000. Collective localization: A distributed kalman filter approach to localization of groups of mobile robots. In Robotics and Automation Conference Proceedings. IEEE, 2958--2965.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. S. Roumeliotis and G. Bekey. 2000. Synergetic localization for groups of mobile robots. In 39th IEEE Conf. on Decision and Control Proceedings, Vol. 4. 3477--3482.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. G. Dudek I. Rekleitis and E. Milios. 2003. Probabilistic cooperative localization and mapping in practice. In IEEE Int. Conf. on Robotics and Automations Proceedings. 1907--1912.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. W Daniel, R Gerhard, M Alessandro, T Drummond, and S Dieter. 2010. Real-time detection and tracking for augmented reality on mobile phones. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 16 (2010), 355--368. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. G. Klein and D. Murray. 2007. Parallel tracking and mapping for small ar workspaces. In 6th IEEE and ACM International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality (ISMAR'17) Proceedings. IEEE Computer Society, 1--10. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. K. Mikolajczyk and C. Schmid. 2001. Indexing based on scale invariant interest points. In International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) Proceedings. 525--531.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. D. G. Lowe. 1999. Object recognition from local scale-invariant features. In International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) Proceedings, Vol. 2. IEEE Computer Society. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. P Bhattacharya and Ms Gavrilova. 2013. A survey of landmark recognition using the bag-of-words framework. Intelligent Computer Graphics 441 (2013), 243--263.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. T Krajnk, M Nitsche, J Faigl, P Vank, L Saska, M and Peuil, T Duckett, and M Mejail. 2014. A Practical Multirobot Localization System. Journal of Intelligent and Robotic Systems 76 (2014), 539--562. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. G. Loianno J. Polin V. Kumar R. Tron, J. Thomas and K. Daniilidis. 2014. Vision-Based Formation Control of Aerial Vehicles. In Workshop on Distributed Control and Estimation for Robotic Vehicle Networks.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Y. Ayatsuka J. Rekimoto and Cybercode. 2000. Designing augmented reality environments with visual tags. In Designing augmented reality environments (DARE'00). ACM, 1--10. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. M Rohs and B Gfeller. 2004. Using camera-equipped mobile phones for interacting with real-world objects. Advances in Pervasive Computing (2004), 265--271.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. D. Claus and A. Fitzgibbon. 2005. Reliable automatic calibration of a marker-based position tracking system. In Workshop on the Applications of Computer Vision Proceedings. 300--305. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. A. Domahidi M. Morari T. Nageli, C. Conte and O. Hilliges. 2014. Environment-independent formation flight for micro aerial vehicles. In Int. Conf. on Intelligent Robots and Systems. IEEE, 1141--1146.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. D. Wagner and D. Schmalstieg. 2007. Artoolkitplus for pose tracking on mobile devices. In Computer Vision Winter Workshop. 139--146.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. K. Schwabe M. Faessler, E. Mueggler and D. Scaramuzza. 2014. A Monocular Pose Estimation System based on Infrared LEDs. In Int. Conf. on Robotics and Automation. IEEE.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. A. Masselli K. E. Wenzel and A. Zell. 2012. Visual Tracking and Following of a Quadrocopter by another Quadrocopter. In Int.Conf. on Intelligent Robots and Systems. IEEE.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. A. Masselli J. J. Lugo and A. Zell. 2013. Following a quadrotor with another quadrotor using onboard vision. In European Conf. on Mobile Robots (ECMR). IEEE.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. R Munoz-Salinas and S Garrido-Jurado. 20013. Aruco library. http://sourceforge.net/projects/aruco/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. P. Bristeau, F. Callou, D. Vissiere, and N. Petit. 2011. The navigation and control technology inside the AR. drone micro UAV. In IFAC World Congress. IFAC, 1477--1484.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. G. Jurado, R. Munoz-Salinas, F. J. Madrid-Cuevas, and M. J. Marin-Jimenez. 2014. Automatic generation and detection of highly reliable fiducial markers under occlusion. Pattern Recognition 47 (2014), 2280--2292. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Recommendations

Comments

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Sign in
  • Published in

    cover image ACM Other conferences
    AIR '17: Proceedings of the 2017 3rd International Conference on Advances in Robotics
    June 2017
    325 pages
    ISBN:9781450352949
    DOI:10.1145/3132446

    Copyright © 2017 ACM

    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    • Published: 28 June 2017

    Permissions

    Request permissions about this article.

    Request Permissions

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • research-article
    • Research
    • Refereed limited

    Acceptance Rates

    Overall Acceptance Rate69of140submissions,49%

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader