2020
DOI: 10.3390/s20236821
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Efficient Path Planing for Articulated Vehicles in Cluttered Environments

Abstract: Motion planning and control for articulated logistic vehicles such as tugger trains is a challenging problem in service robotics. The case of tugger trains presents particular difficulties due to the kinematic complexity of these multiarticulated vehicles. Sampling-based motion planners offer a motion planning solution that can take into account the kinematics and dynamics of the vehicle. However, their planning times scale poorly for high dimensional systems, such as these articulated vehicles moving in a big… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 33 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In the last few decades, several algorithm have been used to determine collision-free paths, and some of the most common are as follows: (a) sampling-based planning algorithms such as rapidly random trees (RRT) [ 16 ], probabilistic roadmap (PRM) [ 1 , 17 ], and the variants of each of them [ 16 ]; (b) graph-based algorithms such as visibility graph [ 18 ] and A* [ 19 ]; (c) heuristic-based algorithms such as ant colony [ 20 ] and genetic-based [ 3 ]; (d) deterministic-based methods, which include artificial potential fields (APFs) [ 21 ] and the homotopy-based path-planning method (HPPM) [ 22 , 23 , 24 ]. These algorithms and methods have been applied in mobile terrestrial robots, UAVs, car-like vehicles, and robotic manipulators [ 1 , 16 , 17 , 20 , 23 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 ]. However, these algorithms and methods still have several drawbacks such as falling into local minima, high computational cost, or long times to obtain a solution path, and some of these do not guarantee a solution path.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the last few decades, several algorithm have been used to determine collision-free paths, and some of the most common are as follows: (a) sampling-based planning algorithms such as rapidly random trees (RRT) [ 16 ], probabilistic roadmap (PRM) [ 1 , 17 ], and the variants of each of them [ 16 ]; (b) graph-based algorithms such as visibility graph [ 18 ] and A* [ 19 ]; (c) heuristic-based algorithms such as ant colony [ 20 ] and genetic-based [ 3 ]; (d) deterministic-based methods, which include artificial potential fields (APFs) [ 21 ] and the homotopy-based path-planning method (HPPM) [ 22 , 23 , 24 ]. These algorithms and methods have been applied in mobile terrestrial robots, UAVs, car-like vehicles, and robotic manipulators [ 1 , 16 , 17 , 20 , 23 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 ]. However, these algorithms and methods still have several drawbacks such as falling into local minima, high computational cost, or long times to obtain a solution path, and some of these do not guarantee a solution path.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A rewiring procedure of RRT* guaranteed asymptotic convergence to optimal solutions with a proper nearest range limit. Various planners based on RRT* were proposed in [ 27 , 28 ]. An RRT*-based planner was proposed for the high-speed maneuvering of autonomous vehicles in [ 23 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%