Distributed MPC for multi-vehicle systems moving in formation☆
Introduction
Boosted by enhancements in communication technologies and computational power, networked multi-vehicle systems have received increasing attention over the last decades. A particular application hereof is formation control of multi-vehicle systems, which forms the basis for applications such as cooperative transportation by small automated guided vehicles or cooperative surveillance. Furthermore, it is well known that the flight efficiency substantially increases when aerial vehicles fly in close formation [1].
State-of-the-art formation control approaches for unmanned vehicles are divided in three main groups: leader–follower techniques [2], [3], virtual structure approaches [4], [5] and behavioral methods [6], [7]. Recent research in these areas mainly focuses on formation stabilization [8], [9] and formation following a predefined path [10], [11]. Integrating motion planning in the formation control structure is typically achieved by separating the problem in (i) finding a trajectory for the (virtual) leader and (ii) controlling the other vehicles to attain a desired relative position with respect to the leader [12]. This architecture is however not robust against failures of the leader. Therefore, this paper aims for an approach in which all members of the formation are equal. This implies that each vehicle searches for its own trajectory. By allowing communication, the vehicles are able to adapt their trajectories in order to satisfy the formation constraints. Such distributed control structure benefits from the flexibility to add or discard agents from the controlled multi-agent system, the possibility to hide local information and the ability to choose and optimize the information flow between the agents. An appealing framework allowing for such architecture is distributed model predictive control (DMPC). It can explicitly address input and state constraints, account for multiple control objectives, and incorporate forecasts of disturbances. Moreover, DMPC distributes the computational load of solving the control problem among the different agents. DMPC has been a very active research area since the end of the 1990s. The reader is referred to [13], [14], [15], [16] for an overview and comparison of various existing approaches.
The control of multi-vehicle systems is in general a complex problem. Various existing MPC approaches have only been applied to the use of linear vehicle dynamics or lack the flexibility to add arbitrary (nonconvex) constraints to the problem formulation such as collision avoidance constraints [17], [18]. Approaches considering realistic nonconvex multi-vehicle problems are mostly limited to solving offline optimal control problems [19], [20]. Decoupling the multi-vehicle control problem efficiently imposes an extra difficulty. Existing DMPC strategies typically solve in every update cycle an optimization problem in a distributed fashion [21], [22]. This generally involves multiple iterations, each of which requires solving local optimization problems and substantial communication between neighboring agents. This often results in too slow update rates in practice as the control law should be implemented on the vehicle’s embedded hardware, which has restricted computational power and communication capabilities.
This paper aims at reducing the existing gap in the literature by presenting a novel DMPC strategy for controlling multi-vehicle systems. The approach focuses on realistic complex problems, including nonlinear vehicle dynamics and collision avoidance constraints. It applies to a particular class of vehicles, including holonomic vehicles, quadrotors and differential wheeled robots. Although various types of vehicle interaction can be incorporated, this paper focuses on vehicles moving in formation.
The approach is based on two main ingredients that allow to solve the resulting optimal control problem in an efficient manner. First, the multi-vehicle problem is decoupled such that the computational load can be distributed over the agents. This is achieved by applying the Alternating Direction Method of Multipliers (ADMM) [23]. In order to reduce the amount of communication, an updating scheme is proposed that solves only one ADMM iteration per control update. Second, a spline parameterization for the vehicles’ motion trajectories and a related enforcement of constraints on these trajectories allow an efficient reformulation of an agent’s local subproblem [24], [25], [26]. This further reduces the computational load of one control update. Although no formal stability proof is provided, various numerical results and an experimental validation demonstrate that the ADMM iterations converge over the subsequent control updates. These updates are performed at a sufficiently fast rate with only a limited loss of optimality. As a complement to the paper, a software toolbox is provided that implements the proposed approach and that forms a user-friendly interface for modeling and simulating the considered problems [27]. Furthermore, additional illustrative examples are supplied in the toolbox.
Section 2 describes the considered vehicle types and the multi-vehicle control problem. Section 3 shows how this problem is reformulated in a small-scale optimization problem, how it is solved in receding-horizon and how it is decoupled over the agents. The proposed approach is further analyzed and illustrated with simulation and experimental examples in Section 4. Finally, Section 5 draws concluding remarks. A preliminary version of this paper considering only linear vehicle dynamics in simulation was presented in [28].
Section snippets
Problem formulation
This section describes the class of vehicles examined in this work. Afterwards the multi-vehicle optimal control problem is presented.
Spline-based DMPC
This section describes the proposed approach for solving the multi-vehicle formation control problem in an efficient and distributed fashion. First, problem (7) is translated into a nonlinear program by adopting a spline parameterization for the motion trajectories and an efficient enforcement of constraints on these trajectories. Second, a scheme is proposed for solving the resulting problem in receding-horizon. Finally, this scheme is further adapted to a DMPC strategy in order to distribute
Examples
The proposed DMPC strategy is illustrated and analyzed by means of three example cases. The first one considers the numerical simulation of a formation of quadrotors flying in a changing environment. The second one considers differential wheeled robots moving in relative formation. The third example validates the DMPC approach experimentally on three robotic platforms. Additional examples are found in the supporting toolbox [27].
Conclusion
This paper presents a novel DMPC strategy for controlling multi-vehicle systems moving in formation. In contrast to existing approaches we allow to handle realistic problems, including nonlinear vehicle dynamics and obstacle avoidance constraints. In order to retrieve an efficient algorithm, efforts are made to reduce the computational and communicational burden. On the one hand the size of the overall optimization is reduced by using a spline parameterization for the vehicles’ trajectories. On
Ruben Van Parys received the M.Sc. degree in industrial science, in 2011, from the Katholieke Hogeschool Brugge-Oostende (KHBO), Belgium, and the M.Sc. degree in mechanical engineering, in 2014, from the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven (KU Leuven), Belgium, where he is currently working towards the Ph.D. degree. His research interests include optimal motion control of mechatronic systems with a focus on cooperating multi-vehicle systems.
References (40)
- et al.
Finite-time formation control for multi-agent systems
Automatica
(2009) - et al.
Formation path following control of unicycle-type mobile robots
Robot. Auton. Syst.
(2010) - et al.
Distributed model predictive control: A tutorial review and future research directions
Comput. Chem. Eng.
(2013) - et al.
Application of distributed predictive control to motion and coordination problems for unicycle autonomous robots
Robot. Auton. Syst.
(2015) - et al.
Aerodynamics, performance and control of airplanes in formation flight
- et al.
Modeling and control of formations of nonholonomic mobile robots
IEEE Trans. Robot. Autom.
(2001) - et al.
Formation control and collision avoidance for multi-agent non-holonomic systems: Theory and experiments
Int. J. Robot. Res.
(2008) - et al.
High precision formation control of mobile robots using virtual structures
Auton. Robots
(1997) - et al.
A coordination architecture for spacecraft formation control
IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol.
(2001) - et al.
Behavior-based formation control for multirobot teams
IEEE Trans. Robot. Autom.
(1998)
Flocking for multi-agent dynamic systems: Algorithms and theory
IEEE Trans. Automat. Control
Multi-agent formation control based on bell-shaped potential functions
J. Intell. Robot. Syst.
Robust formation control of multiple wheeled mobile robots
J. Intell. Robot. Syst.
Coordination and navigation of heterogeneous mav–ugv formations localized by a hawk-eye-like approach under a model predictive control scheme
Int. J. Robot. Res.
Distributed model predictive control: An overview and roadmap of future research opportunities
IEEE Control Syst.
Distributed Model Predictive Control Made Easy
A comparison of distributed MPC schemes on a hydro-power plant benchmark
Optim. Control Appl. Methods
Distributed model predictive control of linear systems with persistent disturbances
Internat. J. Control
Distributed optimization for cooperative agents: Application to formation flight
Energy-optimal motion planning for multiple robotic vehicles with collision avoidance
IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol.
Cited by (71)
Cooperative distributed MPC via decentralized real-time optimization: Implementation results for robot formations
2023, Control Engineering PracticeReal-time distributed trajectory planning for mobile robots
2023, IFAC-PapersOnLineTwo-tier MPC architecture for AGVs navigation assisted by edge computing in an industrial scenario
2023, Internet of Things (Netherlands)Citation Excerpt :On the other hand, the optimization problem increases with the number of robots, thus, potentially increasing the time interval to solve the problem. One way to deal with this problem is to distribute the MPC [35] to be solved by each robot using its onboard computational resources. The robots, therefore, share their trajectory to avoid collisions.
Distributed optimal control of nonlinear systems using a second-order augmented Lagrangian method
2023, European Journal of ControlCoordination of a Semi-Informed Flocking System via Model Predictive Control
2022, IFAC-PapersOnLine
Ruben Van Parys received the M.Sc. degree in industrial science, in 2011, from the Katholieke Hogeschool Brugge-Oostende (KHBO), Belgium, and the M.Sc. degree in mechanical engineering, in 2014, from the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven (KU Leuven), Belgium, where he is currently working towards the Ph.D. degree. His research interests include optimal motion control of mechatronic systems with a focus on cooperating multi-vehicle systems.
Goele Pipeleers is an assistant professor at the Department of Mechanical Engineering of the KU Leuven. She received her M.Sc. degree in mechanical engineering and her Ph.D. degree in mechanical engineering from the KU Leuven, in 2004 and 2009, respectively. She has been a Post-doctoral Fellow of the Research Foundation-Flanders, and a visiting scholar at the Colorado School of Mines and at the University of California Los Angeles. Her research interests include convex optimization, optimal and robust control, and their applications in mechatronics.
- ☆
This work benefits from KU Leuven-BOF PFV/10/002 Centre of Excellence: Optimization in Engineering (OPTEC), from the Belgian Programme on Interuniversity Attraction Poles, initiated by the Belgian Federal Science Policy Office (DYSCO), from the project G0C4515N of the Research Foundation-Flanders (FWO-Flanders) and the KU Leuven Research project C14/15/067: B-spline based certificates of positivity with applications in engineering. Ruben Van Parys is a PhD fellow of FWO-Flanders. The MECO Research Group is an associated research lab of Flanders Make.