Proceedings of the 2009 IEEE

International Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics

December 19 -23, 2009, Guilin, China

Research on Motion Control Algorithm for Mirosot Soccer Robot

ZHU WeibingˈWu LongjunˈLIU ZaixinˈDENG Xinqiao

School of Mechanical Engineering and Automation
Xihua University
Chengdu, 610039, China

Abstract—Based on nonholonomic restriction condition, the
kinematics model of wheeled soccer robot is derived. Based on
dynamic restriction condition, the dynamic model of wheeled
soccer robot is derived with considering the dynamic of driving
electric motor. Analysis shows that the line acceleration and
angle acceleration of soccer robot are related to current line
velocity, angel velocity, given line velocity and given angel
velocity,etc. A new motion control algorithmüüproportion
differential coefficient and second step differential coefficient
(PDD2) is put forward with considering the second step
differential coefficient of distance error and angle error. The
simulation experiments of motion control are done with
proportion method, PD method and PDD2 method. The
experiments show that PDD2 algorithm enables the soccer
an improved motion control algorithm for mirosot soccer
robot will be put forward.
Ċ. KINEMATICS MODEL
We need to analyse the kinematic characteristic of soccer
robot if we want to control its motion. Mirosot soccer robot
is a typical kind of differential driven mobile robot. It is
made up of two independent driving wheels which be
controlled by two direct current servo motors and two
driven wheels which can keep balance[8]. Reference frame
is shown in Fig.1. Position and orientation of soccer robot
is:
P = [x, y , θ ] 
T

robot to move to a moving target point rapidly, accurately and

steadily. Y
Key words-Soccer robot; Motion control; Algorithm vL
vC
* vR
ĉ. INTRODUCTION ˄˅
˅
θ
In order to make soccer robot fulfill point to point motion y
and random angular motion accurately and fleetly, we need
to study the motion control for soccer robot. Motion control 2L
for soccer robot is the foundation of all kinds of intelligent ω r
motion. So, it’s the research emphases in the field of soccer
robot. Domestic and foreign scholars make some research x
O X
on motion control for soccer robot [1][7]. Now, there are 
many motion control methods, for example, proportional Fig. 1. Robot car model
method, PD control method, PID control method, fuzzy
logic controller method, and so on. Because image Assume that there is no lateral slippage during its motion,
acquisition lags and image recognition is not precise, in the soccer robot must satisfy:
addition, the incomplete symmetry of motor which control x sin θ − y cos θ = 0 
the wheels and all kinds of influence factors in the match are
important aspects, so the motion specialty of robot includes So, the kinematic equations of soccer robot are shown as
time-variation, nonlinear, big interference and follows:
nondeterminacy. It can not get better control effect with ª x º ª cos θ 0º
ªν º
P = « y » = « sin θ 0» « C »
traditional PD controller. PID controller is widely used in
the motion control for soccer robot because it’s structure is « » « » ω 
simple and the parameter is easy to adjust, but in 
¬«θ ¼» «¬ 0 1 ¼» ¬ ¼
comparison with the actual system we can find some
questions, for example, the control parameter is difficult to
adjust, and the control system will produce noise, and so on.
In this paper, based on nonholonomic restriction condition,
the kinematics model of wheeled soccer robot will be
derived, based on dynamic restriction condition, the
dynamic model of wheeled soccer robot will be derived, and
978-1-4244-4775-6/09/$25.00 © 2009 IEEE.

Where
vC denotes the linear velocity of mass center
ω denotes the angular velocity of mass center
v L denotes the linear velocity of left wheel
v R denotes the linear velocity of right wheel
r denotes the radius of the twowheels
2 L denotes the distance between the two wheels
437
 ( X , Y ) denotes the coordinate of mass center ­ p = s ( p )ψ
® (6)
ċ. DYNAMIC MODEL ¯ Hψ + Fψ + Kψ = u
We can establish dynamic equation of differential driven Where
mobile robot by using Lagrange Equation [9]-[10]: ª mr I y IZr I yL º
p = s ( p )ψ l « 2 + r +
r »»
(2)
H= « 2L
M ( p ) p = B( p )T + AT ( p )λ β kT « mr I y I r I L
(3)
+ − Z − y »
Where ¬« 2 r 2L r ¼»
p ∈ R n denotes generalized coordinates vector ª mr Iy IZ r I yL º
s( p ) ∈ R n×2 denotes Jacobian Matrix of robot r« + + »
F= « 2 r 2L r »
ψ ∈ R n denotes control vector β kT
« mr
Iy I r IyL»
+ − Z −
M ( p ) ∈ R n×n denotes inertia moment matrix «¬ 2 r 2L r »¼
B( p ) ∈ R n ×r K β ª1 1 º
denotes input transformation matrix K= e «
r ¬L − L»¼
T ∈ R denotes moment control vector
n
From the moving principle of soccer robot, we can get
λ ∈ R m denotes Lagrange product actor vector that the instantaneous acceleration and instantaneous
A( p ) ∈ R m×n denotes full rank constraint matrix angular acceleration are determined by the torque of wheels.
Many scholars study the path and trajectory tracking of N (τ 1 + τ 2 ) M 2 L(τ 1 − τ 2 )
mobile robot by applying (2) and (3).The advantage of this v = = ω = = (7)
m mr Iz I zr
model is intuitionistic and it can reflect the structure of
dynamic system of soccer robot clearly. But it neglects the Where
dynamic characteristic of driving motor. So, it just applies m denotes mass of soccer robot
to simplifying control design. I z denotes moment of inertia
The simplification results in un-modeling disturbing, and N denotes generalized force
it will affect tracking velocity and position-setting. We can M denotes generalized torque
not neglect the dynamic of motor in order to enhance τ 1 ǃ τ 2 denote torque of two wheels
control performance in the occasions of high speed and high From the model of motor, we can get that the relation
precision [11]-[12]. between torque and rotating speed of wheels is shown as
The generalized model of direct current motor is: follow:
dI  =u  =u
Kτ τi + K T τ i + k e Φ
l + γ ⋅ I + keΦ (4) i i (8)
dt Where Kτ ǃ K T denotes stationary coefficient
Where
Because voltage is linear with angular velocity, so (8)
l denotes inductance constant can converse into:
γ denotes resistance constant 
 =k Φ
Kτ τi + K T τ i + k e Φ i Φ i (9)
ke denotes counter electromotive force constant
Linearize first-order for (9) and put it into (7), we can
I denotes armature current get:
u denotes input terminal voltage v = k v1 ( v − k v 2 v )
Φ denotes angular velocity (10)
ω = kω1 (ω − kω 2ω )
 into
Convert driving torque Ti and angular velocity Φ i Where
the wheeled axle. We can get˖ k v1 ǃ k v 2 ǃ kω1 ǃ kω 2 denotes stationary coefficient
l  γ  =u v denotes linear velocity
Ti + Ti + k e β Φ
βkT βkT
i i (5) ω denotes angular velocity
Where Assume that maximum of v is v max and maximum of ω
β denotes gear reduction ratio is ωmax .Assume that the plan velocity of front sampling
kT denotes the moment constant of motor point is ( v k , ωk ) , then the dynamic constraint of sampling
i ( i =1, 2) denotes left wheel and right wheel point in cycle of k+1 is:
Differentiate (3) and put (5) into this equation. We can vk +1 = ( ( x k +1 − x k ) 2 + ( y k +1 − y k ) 2 ) / ΔT
get the dynamic model of soccer robot, and input voltage of (11)
y k +1 − y k y − y k −1
motor is control variable in this model. ωk +1 = ( arctg − arctg k ) / ΔT
x k +1 − x k x k − xk −1

438
vk +1 < vk + k v1 ( v max − k v 2 v k ) ⋅ ΔT of soccer robot in every sampling period. Fig.2 and Fig.3
(12) are the simulation results.
ωk +1 < ωk + kω1 (ωmax − kω 2ωk ) ⋅ ΔT
Where ΔT denotes control period of soccer robot

Č. MOTION CONTROL ALGORITHM

From (10), we can get that linear acceleration and rotary
acceleration have relation to current and specified linear
velocity and angular velocity. Contrarily, the linear velocity
and angular velocity of next control period which need to be
solved should have relation to linear velocity and angular
velocity. It should have relation to linear acceleration and
rotary acceleration, too. So, we put linear acceleration and Fig. 2. Long-distance ( d = 100 ) rectilinear motion
rotary acceleration into motion control algorithm and put
forward a kind of new method which named PDD2 method.
A. Rectilinear Motion
The velocity of two wheels of robot is:
v L = v R = K s × d + K v × d + K a × d (13)
Where
K s denotes proportional gain of rectilinear motion
K v denotes differential gain of rectilinear motion Fig. 3. Small angle ( θ = 30° ) rotation motion
K a denotes second-order differential gain of rectilinear
motion We can get from the above figures that the soccer robot is
d denotes distance error difficult to get to the objective point by using proportional
controlling means. And it oscillates back and forth around
B. Rotation Motion the objective point in a long time. The robot can arrive at
The velocity of two wheels of robot is: the objective point quickly by using PD controller. The
soccer robot can arrive at the objective point more quickly
v R = −v L = Kθ × θ + K ω × θ + K ε × θ (14) and do not oscillate by using PDD2 method. The result is
Where steady, and velocity of convergence is faster than other
Kθ denotes proportional gain of rotor angle motion methods by using PDD2 method in rectilinear motion and
K ω denotes differential gain of rotor angle motion rotation motion.
Because the convergence time is long and easy to
K ε denotes second-order differential gain of rotor angle oscillate using proportional controlling means. So, we just
motion compare PD controller with PDD2 method. We analyze the
θ denotes angular error experimental data and the result show as follow:
C. Fixed Point Motion TABLE I. COMPARISON OF EXPERIMENT DATA
Combine rectilinear motion with rotor angle motion to
Control Mehtod
fixed point motion. We can get that:
(
­v L = K s × d + K v × d + K a × d ) Kinematic Type PD Controller PDD2 Method

°
( )
T0 e T0 e
° − Kθ × θ + K ω × θ + K ε × θ
( )
d=15 27 1.36% 21 0.42%
®   (15) Rectilinear
°v R = K s × d + K v × d + K a × d
Motion d=100 71 1.21% 68 0.51%
°
¯ (
+ Kθ × θ + K ω × θ + K ε × θ ) Rotor Angle Ȯ ¤
Motion Ȯ ¤
5
7
0.86%
0.66%
4
6
0.19%
0.36%
č. SIMULATION EXPERIMENT
Where
In order to validate the validity of PDD2 method, we T0 denotes sampling periods when the robot arrives at the
make researches on simulation. place where the distance between the robot and objective
A. Rectilinear Motion and Rotor Angle Motion point in the range of 0.02d or 0.02θ .
Assume that the soccer robot is static at the beginning. e denotes percentage between the maximal excursion and
We simulate by using proportional controlling method, PD initial error after T0 .
controller and PDD2 method and record relative coordinates We can know that PDD2 method has distinct
predominance in the aspect of velocity of convergence and
stability.

439
B. Fixed Point Motion [4] GAO Jian, HUANG Xin-han,PENG Gang, et al, “Motion control of
mobile robots based on fuzzy-PID,”Control Engineering of China,
Assume that the soccer robot is static at the beginning. no.6,pp. 525-528,2004.
We do some simulations in three situations using PDD2 [5] HEMAMI A, MEHRBI M G, CHENG R M, “Synthesis for
method. Three situations show as follow: anoptimal control law for path tracking in mobile
­d = 30, θ = π / 6 robots,”Automatica, no.2,pp. 383-387,1992.
° [6] Bowling M, Veloso M, “Motion control in dynamic multi-robot
®d = 30, θ = π / 3 (16) environments,”Proceedings of IEEE International Symposium on
°d = 60, θ = π / 2 Computational Intelligence in Robotics and Automation, pp. 168-
¯ 173, 1999.
Fig.4 is the simulation result. We can know from the [7] LIU Zuo-shi, KUANG Xia-yan, WU Cui-qin, “Research on soccer
result that PDD2 method can obtain steady effect with the robot motion control based on fuzzy-PID,”Journal of Engineering
fixed parameter. Design, no.4, pp. 224-227, 2006.
[8] ZHANG Chun-hui, HOU Xiang-lin, XU Xin-he, “Mathematics
25 model of soccer robot system simulation,”Journal of Northeastern
University (Natural Science), no.5, pp. 493-496, 2001.
20
[9] Jong-Hwan Kim, “Lecture notes on multi-robot cooperative system
development,”Seoul, Korea˖Green Publishing Company, 1998.
15
[10] J.miura, Y.Shirai, “Modeling motion uncertainty of moving
10 obstacles for robot motion planning,”In: Proc. of the 2000 IEEE
International Conference and Robotics & Automatiun, San
5 Franciaieu, no.4, pp. 2258-2263.
[11] Eideeb Y, Eimaraghy W H, “Robust adaptive control of robotic
10 20 30 40 50 60 manipulator including motor dynamics,”Journal of Robotic
Systems, no.11, pp. 661-669, 1998.
Fig. 4. Fixed point motion
[12] Su C Y, Stepanenko Y, “On the robust control of robot manipulators
including actuator dynamics,”Journal of Robotic Systems, no.1, pp.
1-10, 1996.
. CONCLUSION
1 ˅ Based on nonholonomic restriction condition, the
kinematics model of wheeled soccer robot is derived. Based
on dynamic restriction condition, the dynamic model of
wheeled soccer robot is derived with considering the
dynamic of driving electric motor. Put second step
differential coefficient of distance error and angle error into
motion control algorithm. PDD2 method is put forward.
2 ˅ The simulation experiments of motion control are
done with proportion method, PD method and PDD2
method. The experiments show that PDD2 algorithm enables
the soccer robot to move to a moving target point rapidly,
accurately and steadily.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors would like to thank for the Key Scientific
Research Fund of Xihua University (No.zg0720202).

REFERENCES
[1] CHEN Xiao-ping, “Recent advances in robocup,”Techniques and
Applications of Robot, no.1, pp. 25-28, 2001.
[2] LEI Li, LI Zu-shu, WANG Niu, “Study of robot soccer’s basic
motion based on HSIC,”Journal of Harbin Institute of Technology
(Natural Sciences), no.7, pp. 978 – 980, 2004.
[3] J IANG Xiao-hua, XIONG Rong, ZHOU Ke, “Optimization of
soccer robot’s basic motion based on predictive fuzzy
control,”Journal of Sichuan University (Engineering Science), no.3,
pp. 79-82, 2003.

440