University of Nevada, Reno the Development and Optimization of A
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
University of Nevada, Reno The Development and Optimization of a Teleoperated Four-Wheel Drive/Four-Wheel Steer Vehicle A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Mechanical Engineering by Travis D. Fields Dr. Eric L. Wang/Thesis Advisor December, 2009 i Abstract A teleoperated four wheel drive/four wheel steer vehicle was developed. The vehicle was designed according to no slip conditions in which the wheels maintained zero velocity relative to the ground in both longitudinal and latitudinal directions. The vehicle was controlled with an intuitive interface (steering wheel and pedal). Video and command information were sent between a command station and the vehicle via two amateur radio transceivers. An empirical approach for determining the optimal handling characteristics for a four wheel steering vehicle is described. A two dimensional optimization is performed using Powell’s method. The two parameters in question are the steering sensitivity gain and the gain to control instantaneous center of rotation coordinate Y (denoted y gain). Results concluded that the steering gain has a negligible effect on the handling characteristics while the y gain has a significant impact on the handling characteris- tics. It was also concluded that the main limitation in the testing method was the robustness of the test vehicle and the control software. To decrease experimental iterations a one dimensional optimization is recommended utilizing the speed and efficiency of the golden section search method. ii Acknowledgements I would like to thank my advisor, Dr. Eric Wang for his invaluable guidance throughout this project. I know his mentoring style will prepare me for the road ahead. I would also like to thank Dr. Jeffrey LaCombe and Dr. Kam Leang for their help and for participating on my graduate committee. I want to acknowledge the Nevada Space Grant Consortium for their consistent funding of the NevadaSat program as well as the many scholarships and fellowships I received from them. I would also like to thank Gabe Herz and Gregory Kraus for assisting with the rover and the test setups. The 2009 UNR Mars URC team must also be thanked, as together we developed an amazingly complex piece of machinery. One day hopefully we will have refined it enough to eliminate the magic smoke. Finally, I would like to personally thank Lauren La Croix for her continued sup- port. She put aside her own work to assist in testing the rover sometimes until 2 a.m. I am incredibly grateful for her sacrifices and loving support. She has kept me sane through the many long nights finishing this project. iii Contents 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Motivation................................. 1 1.2 ThesisObjectives ............................. 4 1.3 ThesisOrganization............................ 4 2 Background 5 2.1 Teleoperation ............................... 5 2.1.1 Vision ............................... 5 2.1.2 Communication.......................... 7 2.1.3 LevelsofControl ......................... 10 2.2 InstantaneousCenterofRotation(ICR) . .. 13 2.2.1 ControllingtheLocationoftheICR. 13 3 4WD/4WS Vehicle Development 17 3.1 Initial Vehicle Development . 17 3.2 DesignSpecifications ........................... 20 3.3 Hardware ................................. 21 3.3.1 Chassis............................... 22 3.3.2 Onboard Electronics and Communications . 26 3.3.3 Sensors............................... 29 iv 3.4 Software.................................. 30 3.4.1 Derivations ............................ 31 3.4.2 ControlSystems.......................... 36 3.5 SteeringGain ............................... 42 4 Gain Optimization Methods 44 4.1 TestCourse ................................ 45 4.2 OptimizationRoutine. .. .. 46 4.3 DriverRatingScale............................ 52 4.4 DataCollection .............................. 53 5 Optimization Results 55 5.1 OptimizationoftheControlGains . 55 5.1.1 Discussion............................. 59 5.1.2 Limitations ............................ 62 5.2 Cooper-HarperRating .......................... 64 5.2.1 Discussion............................. 65 5.2.2 Limitations ............................ 65 5.3 ValidityofTestingMethod. 66 5.3.1 Discussion............................. 66 5.3.2 Limitations ............................ 68 5.4 Speed versus Handling Characteristics . ... 69 5.4.1 Discussion............................. 69 5.4.2 Limitations ............................ 71 6 Conclusion 73 6.1 Recommendations............................. 74 v A Collected Data 79 B Reading from the USB4 80 C Matlab Files 84 C.1 Powell.m.................................. 84 C.2 Aurea.m(GolenSectionSearch) . 87 C.3 Bracket.m ................................. 90 C.4 Powell run.m ............................... 91 C.5 lap timer.m ................................ 92 vi List of Figures 1.1 a) 2WS Vehicle, b)Crab 4WS - High Speed c) Perfect 4WS d) Forklift 4WS-LowSpeed............................. 3 2.1 Mars exploration rover stereo vision camera assembly [14]. ...... 6 2.2 Left: Predator UAV; Right: Predator command station [15]...... 7 2.3 Mopping slave of TORMS. 1: tracked mobile platform, 2: mopping tool, 3: winding roller, 4; wet mopping cloth, 5: mopping slave with a moppingcloth.[17] ............................ 8 2.4 Victor 6000 deep underwater submersible (Ifremer, France)[18] ... 8 2.5 Radio frequencies allotted to amateur operators [30] . ........ 12 2.6 Front and rear wheel steering angles as a function of steering wheel angle[32]. ................................. 15 3.1 2007 Mars University Rover Challenge Vehicle . .... 18 3.2 2008 Mars URC vehicle demonstrating lack of rigidity in the suspension assembly. ................................. 19 3.3 2008 Mars URC vehicle 4WD/2WS suspension assembly. ... 20 3.4 Current 4WD/4WS vehicle suspension and box. .. 23 3.5 Steeringsubassembly.. .. .. 24 3.6 Vehicle drive train (wheel and drive motor). .... 25 vii 3.7 Diagram showing dimensions for vehicle platform. ...... 32 3.8 Flowchart of the test vehicle control software. ...... 38 4.1 Test course layout, all units are in feet. .... 46 4.2 Test vehicle at starting line on the test course for gain optimization experiment. ................................ 47 4.3 Cooper-Harper rating scale for pilot evaluation. ....... 53 4.4 Modified Cooper-Harper rating scale for numerical-experimental opti- mization................................... 54 5.1 Score versus experiment number. 56 5.2 y gain, KY ,versusscore. ......................... 58 5.3 Steeringgainversusscore. 59 5.4 Cooper-Harperratingversusscore. .. 64 5.5 Normalized standard deviation versus experiment score......... 67 5.6 All five completed runs versus score for several experiment numbers. 68 5.7 Number of reversals (changes in direction) of the steering input versus theexperimentnumber. .. .. 70 5.8 Average vehicle speed versus time for experiment 3 (top) and 36 (bot- tom)..................................... 72 A.1 Recorded and Calculated Data from Optimization Routine ...... 79 B.1 LabVIEW block diagram with library call nodes for reading current position................................... 81 B.2 Call Library Function window for reading current position....... 82 B.3 LabVIEW block diagram with library call nodes for reading current angular velocity. Note: black lines represent bundled variable passed throughshiftregister.. 83 viii List of Tables 5.1 Experimental Results. Note: The number of cones is given as a range over the course of the five runs for each experiment. For example, experiment 17 had the number of cones hit range from zero and two overthefiveruns.............................. 57 5.2 Optimal gain ranges for both Y Gain and Steering Gain. .... 59 5.3 Other possible parameters that could affect control. ....... 63 ix Nomenclature: 2WS : Two wheel steer 4WD : Four wheel drive 4WS : Four wheel steer α1 − α4 : Steering angle for each wheel αc : Current wheel angle αd : Desired wheel angle αP : Control system steering input αs : Steering wheel angle ~ω : Angular velocity of the vehicle in the Newtonian reference frame AT : Advanced telecommanding ATV : Amateur television BT : Basic telecommanding C-H rating : Cooper-Harper rating DOF : Degree of freedom es : Current error sum ESC : Electronic Speed Controller HAM radio : Amateur radio ICR : Instantaneous center of rotation Kc : Number of cones hit KI : Integral gain KP : Proportional gain x Ks : Steering sensitivity gain KY : y gain l : Distance from center of gravity to front (or rear) axle Mars URC : Mars Society University Rover Challenge Mc : Motor output command ~n1 − ~n4 : Position vectors for each wheel from the instantaneous center of rotation n¯ : average position relative to instantaneous center of rotation R : Radius of curvature; distance between vehicle center of gravity and instantaneous center of rotation RC : Remote control S : Cost function to be optimized T : Average time ~ VO : Velocity of the instantaneous center of rotation V~1 − V~4 : Velocity of center of each wheel Vc : Current wheel speed Vd : Desired speed w : Distance from center of gravity to right (or left) side of vehicle x : Horizontal position of the instantaneous center of rotation y : Vertical position of the instantaneous center of rotation 1 Chapter 1 Introduction 1.1 Motivation Control of four wheel drive/four wheel steer (4WD/4WS) vehicles has been greatly researched in the last 30 years, however, little research has been done in empirical optimization techniques for these vehicles. Comparisons have