3.8 Proceedings Paper

Nonlinear Model Predictive Control for Human-Robot Handover with Application to the Aerial Case

出版社

IEEE
DOI: 10.1109/IROS47612.2022.9981045

关键词

-

资金

  1. ANR [ANR-18CE33-0001, ANR-17-CE33-0007]
  2. European Commission [EC 871479]
  3. Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR) [ANR-17-CE33-0007] Funding Source: Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This article discusses the delivery of an object to a human coworker using an aerial robot. It presents a Nonlinear Model Predictive Control (NMPC) method that considers ergonomics and can be applied to any multi-rotor aerial vehicle. The control framework optimizes human ergonomics, adapts to human movements, maintains visibility, and avoids collision risks.
In this article, we consider the problem of delivering an object to a human coworker by means of an aerial robot (AR). To this aim, we present an ergonomics-aware Nonlinear Model Predictive Control (NMPC) designed to autonomously perform the handover. The method is general enough to be applied to any multi-rotor aerial vehicle (MRAV) with a minimal adaptation of the robot model. The formulation of the optimal control problem steers the AR toward a handover location by optimizing the human coworker ergonomics, which includes the predicted arm joint torques of the human. The motion task is expressed in a frame relative to the human, whose motion model is included in the equations of the NMPC. This allows the controller to promptly adapt to the human movements by predicting her future poses over the horizon. The control framework also accounts for the problem of maintaining visibility on the human coworker, while respecting both the actuation and state limits of the robot. Additionally, a safety barrier is embedded in the controller to avoid any risk of collision with the human partner. Realistic simulations are performed to validate the feasibility of the approach and the source code of the implementation is released open-source.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据