Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T01:19:18.533Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Point-to-Point Motion Planning of a Free-Floating Space Manipulator Using the Rapidly-Exploring Random Trees (RRT) Method

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 July 2019

Tomasz Rybus Open the ORCID record for Tomasz Rybus [Opens in a new window]
Tomasz Rybus*
Affiliation:
Electronics Faculty, Wrocław University of Science and Technology, Janiszewskiego 11/17, 50-372 Wrocław, Poland and Space Mechatronics and Robotics Laboratory, Space Research Centre (CBK PAN), Bartycka 18a, 00-716 Warsaw, Poland
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

It is usually proposed to use a robotic manipulator for performing on-orbit capture of a target satellite in the planned active debris removal and on-orbit servicing missions. Control of the satellite-manipulator system is challenging because motion of the manipulator influences position and orientation of the chaser satellite. Moreover, the trajectory selected for the capture manoeuvre must be collision-free. In this article, we consider the case of a nonredundant manipulator mounted on a free-floating satellite.We propose to use the bi-directional rapidly-exploring random trees (RRT) algorithm to achieve two purposes: to plan a collision-free manipulator trajectory that, at the same time, will result in a desired change of the chaser satellite orientation. Several improvements are introduced in comparison to the previous applications of the RRT method for manipulator mounted on a free-floating satellite. Feasibility of the proposed approach is demonstrated in numerical simulations performed for the planar case in which the chaser satellite is equipped with a 2-DoF (Degree of Freedom) manipulator. The obtained results are analysed and compared with the results obtained from collision-free trajectory planning methods that do not allow to set the desired final orientation of the chaser satellite.

Keywords

Space roboticsRRT algorithmTrajectory planning
Type
Articles
Information
Robotica , Volume 38 , Issue 6 , June 2020 , pp. 957 - 982
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2019

References

Hastings, D. E., Putbrese, B. L. and La Tour, P. A., “When will on-orbit servicing be part of the space enterprise?” Acta Astronaut. 127, 655–666 (2016).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graham, A. R. and Kingston, J, “Assessment of the commercial viability of selected options for on-orbit servicing (OOS),” Acta Astronaut. 117, 38–48 (2015).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pelton, J. N., New Solutions for the Space Debris Problem (Springer, Heidelberg, 2015).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liou, J.-C., “An active debris removal parametric study for LEO environment remediation,” Adv. Space Res. 47(11), 1865–1876 (2011).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biesbroek, R, Innocenti, L, Wolahan, A and Serrano, S. M., “e. Deorbit - ESA’s Active Debris Removal Mission,” Proceedings of the 7th European Conference on Space Debris, Darmstadt, Germany (2017).Google Scholar
Skinner, M. A., “Orbital debris: what are the best near-term actions to take? A view from the field,” J. Space Saf. Eng. 4(2), 105–111 (2017).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Visentin, G and Brown, D. L., “Robotics for geostationary satellite servicing,” Rob. Auton. Syst. 23(1), 45–51 (1998).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, D. A., Martin, C, Kassebom, M, Petersen, H, Shaw, A, Skidmore, B, Smith, D, Stokes, H and Willig, A, “A mission to preserve the geostationary region,” Adv. Space Res. 34(5), 1214–1218 (2004).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hausmann, G, Wieser, M, Haarmann, R, Brito, A and Meyer, J. C., “e.Deorbit Mission: OHB Debris Removal Concepts,”Proceedings of the 13th Symposium on Advanced Space Technologies in Robotics and Automation (ASTRA 2015), ESTEC, Noordwijk, The Netherlands (2015).Google Scholar
Zappulla, R, Virgili-Llop, J, Zagaris, C, Park, H and Romano, M, “Dynamic air-bearing hardware-inthe-loop testbed to experimentally evaluate autonomous spacecraft proximity maneuvers,” J. Spacecraft Rockets 54(4), 825–839 (2017).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rekleitis, I, Martin, E, Rouleau, G, L’Archeveque, R, Parsa, K and Dupuis, E, “Autonomous capture of a tumbling satellite,” J. Field Robot. 24(4), 275–296 (2007).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carignan, C. R. and Akin, D. L., “The reaction stabilization of on-orbit robots,” IEEE Control Syst. Mag. 20(6), 19–33 (2000).Google Scholar
Oda, M and Ohkami, Y, “Coordinated control of spacecraft attitude and space manipulators,” Control Eng. Pract. 5(1), 11–21 (1997).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Egeland, O and Sagli, J. R., “Coordination of motion in a spacecraft/manipulator system,” Int. J. Rob. Res. 12(4), 366–379 (1993).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Papadopoulos, E and Dubowsky, S, “Coordinated Manipulator/Spacecraft Motion Control for Space Robotic Systems,” Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA 1991), Sacramento, CA, USA (1991).Google Scholar
Jaekel, S, Lampariello, R, Rackl, W, Brunner, B, Porges, O, Kraemer, E, Pietras, M, Ratti, J, and Biesbroek, R, “Robotic Aspects and Analyses in the Scope of the e.Deorbit Mission Phase B1,” Proceedings of the 14th Symposium on Advanced Space Technologies in Robotics and Automation (ASTRA 2017), Leiden, The Netherlands (2017).Google Scholar
Telaar, J, Ahrns, I, Estable, S, Rackl, W, De Stefano, M, Lampariello, R, Santos, N, Serra, P, Canetri, M, Ankersen, F and Gil-Fernandez, J, “GNC Architecture for the e. Deorbit Mission,” Proceedings of the 7th European Conference for Aeronautics and Space Sciences (EUCASS 2017), Milan, Italy (2017).Google Scholar
Rank, R, Mühlbauer, Q, Naumann, W and Landzettel, K, “The DEOS Automation and Robotics Payload,”Proceedings of the 11th ESA Workshop on Advanced Space Technologies for Robotics and Automation (ASTRA 2011), ESTEC, Noordwijk, The Netherlands (2011).Google Scholar
Rybus, T and Seweryn, K, “Manipulator Trajectories During Orbital Servicing Mission: Numerical Simulations and Experiments on Microgravity Simulator,” Proceedings of the 6th European Conference for Aeronautics and Space Sciences (EUCASS 2015), Kraków, Poland (2015).Google Scholar
Dubowsky, S and Papadopoulos, E, “The kinematics, dynamics, and control of free-flying and free-floating space robotic systems,” IEEE Trans. Robot. Autom. 9(5), 531–543 (1993).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellery, A, “An engineering approach to the dynamic control of space robotic on-orbit servicers,” Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part G: J. Aerosp. Eng. 218(2), 79–98 (2004).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hwang, Y. K. and Ahuja, N, “Gross motion planning–a survey,” ACMComput. Surv. 24(3), 219–291 (1992).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rybus, T, “Obstacle avoidance in space robotics: Review of major challenges and proposed solutions,” Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 101, 31–48 (2018).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lampariello, R, “On grasping a tumbling debris object with a free-flying robot,” IFAC Proc. Volumes 46(19), 161–166 (2013).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Toglia, C, Sabatini, M, Gasbarri, P and Palmerini, G. B., “Optimal target grasping of a flexible space manipulator for a class of objectives,” Acta Astronaut. 68(7), 1031–1041 (2011).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mukherjee, R and Nakamura, Y, “Nonholonomic Redundancy of Space Robots and its Utilization via Hierarchical Lyapunov Functions,” Proceedings of the American Control Conference (ACC 1991), Boston, MA, USA (1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yanoshita, Y and Tsuda, S, “Space Robot Path Planning for Collision Avoidance,” Proceedings of the International MultiConference of Engineers and Computer Scientists (IMECS 2009), vol. 2, Hong Kong (2009).Google Scholar
Bhargava, T. V. and Issac, K. K., “Minimum time collision-free trajectories for grabbing a non-tumbling satellite,” IFAC-PapersOnLine 49(1), 142–147 (2016).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gao, X, Jia, Q, Sun, H and Chen, G, “Research on path planning for 7-DOF space manipulator to avoid obstacle based on A* algorithm,” Sens. Lett. 9(4), 1515–1519 (2011).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rybus, T and Seweryn, K, “Application of Rapidly-Exploring Random Trees (RRT) Algorithm for Trajectory Planning of Free-Floating Space Manipulator,” Proceedings of the 10th International Workshop on Robot Motion and Control (RoMoCo 2015), Poznań, Poland (2015).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benevides, J. R. and Grassi, V, “Autonomous Path Planning of Free-Floating Manipulators Using RRT-Based Algorithms,” Proceedings of the 12th Latin American Robotics Symposium and 3rd Brazilian Symposium on Robotics (LARS-SBR), Uberlandia, Minas Gerais, Brazil (2015).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Balaram, J. B. and Stone, H.W., “Automated Assembly in the JPL Telerobot Testbed,” In: Intelligent Robotic Systems for Space Exploration (Desrochers, A. A., ed.) (Springer, New York, 1992) pp. 297–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mathur, R. K., Münger, R and Sanderson, A. C., “Hierarchical Planning for Space-Truss Assembly,” In: Intelligent Robotic Systems for Space Exploration (Desrochers, A. A., ed.) (Springer, New York, 1992) pp. 141–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huang, P and Xu, Y, “Attitude Compensation of Space Robots for Capturing Operation,” In: Mobile Robots:Towards New Applications (Lazinica, A, ed.) (InTech, 2006) pp. 499–512.Google Scholar
Oda, M, “Coordinated Control of Spacecraft Attitude and its Manipulator,” Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA 1996), Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA (1996).Google Scholar
Sone, H and Nenchev, D. N., “On Some Practical Reactionless Motion Tasks with a Free-Floating Space Robot,” Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA 2015), Seattle, WA, USA (2015).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vafa, Z and Dubowsky, S, “On the Dynamics of Manipulators in Space Using the Virtual Manipulator Approach,” Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA 1987), Raleigh, NC, USA (1987).Google Scholar
Vafa, Z, “Space Manipulator Motions with No Satellite Attitude Disturbances,” Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA 1990), Cincinnati, OH, USA (1990).Google Scholar
Marchesi, M, Angrilli, F and Venezia, R, “Coordinated Control for Free-Flyer Space Robots,” Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Nashville, TN, USA (2000).Google Scholar
Zhang, F, Fu, Y, Hua, L, Chen, H, Wang, S and Guo, B, “Point-to-Point Planning for Free-Floating Space Manipulator with Zero-Disturbance Spacecraft Attitude,” Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Information and Automation (ICIA 2012), Seoul, Korea (2012).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Piersigilli, P, Sharf, I and Misra, A. K., “Reactionless capture of a satellite by a two degree-of-freedom manipulator,” Acta Astronaut. 66(1–2), 183–192 (2010).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yoshida, K, Hashizume, K and Abiko, S, “Zero Reaction Maneuver: Flight Validation with ETS-VII Space Robot and Extension to Kinematically Redundant Arm,” Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA 2001), Seoul, Korea (2001).Google Scholar
Nakamura, Y and Mukherjee, R, “Nonholonomic path planning of space robots via a bidirectional approach,” IEEE Trans. Robot. Autom. 7(4), 500–514 (1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fernandes, C, Gurvits, L and Li, Z. X., “Attitude Control of Space Platform/Manipulator System Using Internal Motion,” In: Space Robotics: Dynamics and Control (Xu, Y and Kanade, T, eds.) (Springer, Boston, 1993) pp. 131–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xu, W, Li, C, Wang, X, Liu, Y, Liang, B and Xu, Y, “Study on non-holonomic cartesian path planning of a free-floating space robotic system,” Adv. Robotics 23(1–2), 113–143 (2009).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Papadopoulos, E, Tortopidis, I and Nanos, K, “Smooth Planning for Free-Floating Space Robots Using Polynomials,” Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA 2005), Barcelona, Spain (2005).Google Scholar
Tortopidis, I and Papadopoulos, E, “Point-to-Point Planning: Methodologies for Underactuated Space Robots,” Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA 2006), Orlando, FL, USA (2006).Google Scholar
Tortopidis, I and Papadopoulos, E, “On point-to-point motion planning for underactuated space manipulator systems,” Rob. Auton. Syst. 55(2), 122–131 (2007).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
LaValle, S. M. and Kuffner, J. J., “Randomized kinodynamic planning,” Int. J. Robot. Res. 20(5), 378–400 (2001).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seweryn, K and Banaszkiewicz, M, “Optimization of the Trajectory of a General Free-Flying Manipulator During the Rendezvous Maneuver,” Proceedings of the AIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conference and Exhibit (AIAA-GNC 2008), Honolulu, Hawaii, USA (2008).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rybus, T, Seweryn, K and Sasiadek, J. Z., “Control system for free-floating space manipulator based on nonlinear model predictive control (NMPC),” J. Intell. Robot. Syst. 85(3), 491–509 (2017).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Umetani, Y and Yoshida, K, “Resolved motion rate control of space manipulators with generalized Jacobian matrix,” IEEE Trans. Robot. Autom. 5, 303–314 (1989).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Junkins, J. L. and Schaub, H, “An instantaneous eigenstructure quasivelocity formulation for nonlinear multibody dynamics,” J. Astronaut. Sci. 45(3), 279–295 (1997).Google Scholar
Kindracki, J, Tur, K, Paszkiewicz, P, Mezyk, L, Boruc, L and Wolanski, P, “Experimental research on low-cost cold gas propulsion for a space robot platform,” Aerosp. Sci. Technol. 62, 148–157 (2017).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flores-Abad, A, Ma, O, Pham, K and Ulrich, S, “A review of space robotics technologies for on-orbit servicing,” Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 68, 1–26 (2014).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weghe, M. V., Ferguson, D and Srinivasa, S. S., “Randomized path planning for redundant manipulators without inverse kinematics,” Proceedings of the 7th IEEE-RAS International Conference on Humanoid Robots, Pittsburgh, USA (2007).Google Scholar
Sintov, A and Shapiro, A, “Time-Based RRT Algorithm for Rendezvous Planning of Two Dynamic Systems,” Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA 2014), Hong Kong, China (2014).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berenson, D, Srinivasa, S. S., Ferguson, D and Kuffner, J. J., “Manipulation Planning on Constraint Manifolds,” Proceedings of the 2009 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA 2009), Kobe, Japan (2009).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
LaValle, S and Kuffner, J, “Rapidly-Exploring Random Trees: Progress and Prospects,” In: Mobile Robots: Towards New Applications (Donald, B. R., Lynch, K. M. and Rus, D, eds.) (A. K. Peters, Wellesley, MA, 2001) pp. 293–308.Google Scholar
Mu, Z, Xu, W, Gao, X, Xue, L and Li, C, “Obstacles Modeling and Collision Detection of Space Robots for Performing On-Orbit Services,” Proceedings of the 4th IEEE International Conference on Information Science and Technology (ICIST’2014), Shenzhen, China (2014).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waldron, K. J. and Schmiedeler, J, “Kinematics,” In: Springer Handbook of Robotics (Siciliano, B and Khatib, O, eds.) (Springer, New York, 2016) pp. 11–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Noreen, I, Khan, A and Habib, Z, “Optimal path planning using RRT* based approaches: a survey and future directions,” Int. J. Adv. Comput. Sci. Appl. 7, 97–107 (2016).Google Scholar
Rybus, T and Seweryn, K, “Zastosowanie metody sztucznych pól potencjału do planowania trajektorii manipulatora satelitarnego,” In: Postepy Robotyki, Oficyna Wydawnicza Politechniki Warszawskiej, Warszawa (Tchon, K and Zielinski, C, eds.) (2018) pp. 61–74 [in polish: Application of the artificial potential field method for trajectory planning of space manipulator].Google Scholar
Khatib, O, “Real-time obstacle avoidance for manipulators and mobile robots,” Int. J. Rob. Res. 5(1), 396–404 (1986).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rybus, T, Seweryn, K, Oles, J, Basmadji, F. L., Tarenko, K, Moczydlowski, R, Barcinski, T, Kindracki, J, Mezyk, L, Paszkiewicz, P and Wolanski, P, “Application of a planar air-bearing microgravity simulator for demonstration of operations required for an orbital capture with a manipulator,” Acta Astronaut. 155, 221–229 (2019).CrossRefGoogle Scholar