Cart (Loading....) | Create Account
Close category search window
 

Reconfiguration Planning Among Obstacles for Heterogeneous Self-Reconfiguring Robots

Sign In

Cookies must be enabled to login.After enabling cookies , please use refresh or reload or ctrl+f5 on the browser for the login options.

Formats Non-Member Member
$31 $13
Learn how you can qualify for the best price for this item!
Become an IEEE Member or Subscribe to
IEEE Xplore for exclusive pricing!
close button

puzzle piece

IEEE membership options for an individual and IEEE Xplore subscriptions for an organization offer the most affordable access to essential journal articles, conference papers, standards, eBooks, and eLearning courses.

Learn more about:

IEEE membership

IEEE Xplore subscriptions

3 Author(s)
Fitch, R. ; Department of Computer Science Dartmouth College Hanover, NH USA rfitch@cs.dartmouth.edu ; Butler, Z. ; Rus, D.

Most reconfiguration planners for self-reconfiguring robots do not consider the placement of specific modules within the configuration. Recently, we have begun to investigate heterogeneous reconfiguration planning in lattice-based systems, in which there are various classes of modules. The start and goal configurations specify the class of each module, in addition to placement. Our previous work presents solutions for this problem with unrestricted free space available to the robot during reconfiguration, and also free space limited to a thin connected region over the entire surface of the configuration. In this paper, we further this restriction and define free space by an arbitrarily-shaped bounding region. This addresses the important problem of reconfiguration among obstacles, and reconfiguration over a rigid surface. Our algorithm plans module trajectories through the volume of the structure, and is divided into two phases: shape-forming, and sorting the goal configuration to correctly position modules by class. The worst-case running time for the first phase is O(n2) with O(n2) moves for an n-module robot, and a loose upper bound for the second phase is O(n4) time and moves. However, we show this bound to be Θ (n2)time and moves in common instances.

Published in:

Robotics and Automation, 2005. ICRA 2005. Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE International Conference on

Date of Conference:

18-22 April 2005

Need Help?


IEEE Advancing Technology for Humanity About IEEE Xplore | Contact | Help | Terms of Use | Nondiscrimination Policy | Site Map | Privacy & Opting Out of Cookies

A not-for-profit organization, IEEE is the world's largest professional association for the advancement of technology.
© Copyright 2014 IEEE - All rights reserved. Use of this web site signifies your agreement to the terms and conditions.