4.6 Article

Improved Particle Swarm Optimization Algorithm for AGV Path Planning

期刊

IEEE ACCESS
卷 9, 期 -, 页码 33522-33531

出版社

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3061288

关键词

Machine tools; Conferences; Production; Transportation; Task analysis; Heuristic algorithms; Path planning; Automated guided vehicle; improved particle swarm optimization algorithm; scheduling optimization; routing plan

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [61773192, 61803192]
  2. Special fund plan for local science and technology development lead by central authority, Research project of Liaocheng University [318011922]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper studies the AGV path planning problem in smart manufacturing workshops, establishes a mathematical model and proposes an improved particle swarm optimization algorithm to obtain an optimal path. Experimental results show that the algorithm can improve the efficiency of AGV in material transportation.
In smart manufacturing workshops, automated guided vehicles (AGVs) are increasingly used to transport materials required for machine tools. This paper studies the AGV path planning problem of a one-line production line in the workshop, establishes a mathematical model with the shortest transportation time as the objective function, and proposes an improved particle swarm optimization(IPSO) algorithm to obtain an optimal path. In order to be suitable for solving the path planning problem, we propose a new coding method based on this algorithm, design a crossover operation to update the particle position, and adopt a mutation mechanism to avoid the algorithm from falling into the local optimum. By calculating the shortest transportation time obtained, the improved algorithm is compared with other intelligent optimization algorithms. The experimental results show that the algorithm can improve the efficiency of AGV in material transportation and verify the effectiveness of related improvement mechanisms.

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

4.6
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