team of omnidirectional robots for cooperative tasks

Team of Omnidirectional Robots for Cooperative Tasks

Senior Design 2011Group 01

Members: Josh ClausmanPeter MartinsonSeth Beinhart

Advisors: Dr. Nicola EliaMatt Griffith

Client: Department of Electrical and Computer EngineeringIowa State University

Problem StatementTo build a third omnidirectional robot for Dr.

Nicola Elia’s research on cooperative tasks in distributed robotics

Robot design should be simple enough so that additional robots can be easily produced

Overcome power system, wheel design and computational limitations of previous designs

Cooperative tasks using robots as time permitsOmnidirectional Robots – Senior Design ‘11 Beinhart ,Clausman,

Martinson

Concept Diagram adopted from May-09-05 Senior Design Group

Concept Diagram

Omnidirectional Robots – Senior Design ‘11 Beinhart ,Clausman, Martinson

Functional RequirementsMovement

2.1.1.1: Speed - 2 m/s2.1.1.2: Acceleration - 6

m/s22.1.1.3: Omnidirectional2.1.3.1: Relative position

± 2cm wheel encodersCommunication

2.1.2.1: 802.11-G (WiFi)2.1.3.2: Localization

packets

The power system:2.1.4.1: CPU Module:

5V ± 5% @ 4A2.1.4.4: Other: 3.3V ±

5% @ 2A2.1.5.2: Motor: 6-14V @

12AMotor Control

2.1.5.1 Quadrature encoders

2.1.5.4 Reconfigurable control loop

Non-functional RequirementsPhysical

2.2.1.1: Weight < 1.5 kg2.2.1.2: 18cm diameter, 15cm tall

Computer Hardware2.2.2.1: x86 architecture2.2.2.2: Floating Point

Unit2.2.2.3: PC/104+2.2.2.4: $2000 or less

Power System2.2.3.1: Battery over

dischargeIntegration

2.2.5.1: Localization system

2.2.5.2: Upload code/commands

2.2.5.3: Linux2.2.5.4: Run old code


Assumptions and LimitationsAssumptions

Old bots can handle new collaborative tasksx-y-z coordinate system will be availableRobots constrained to 'playing area'

LimitationsGroup size - previously groups of 6-7Backwards compatibilityRequired physical similaritiesCamera delay (200 ms)



Market SurveyThe Robocup competition Cornell has the most recognized design and

had been reference heavily when designing our robot.

Risks and MitigationsRisks MitigationPower board design

could fail

Inability to interface with legacy system

Future groups not being able to use our system

Advisor design review

Work closely with advisor Matt Griffith who is experienced with legacy system

Good documentation practices



Cost Estimation

Physical Computer Hardware

Wheels* $200.00 CPU Board $565.00

Motors* $1,000.00 Motor Controller $229.00

Frame* $50.00 Motor Drivers X2 $119.90

Ball Launcher $50.00 TTL to RS232 $9.99Power System 802.11-G card $49.99

Batteries $107.98 IMU $125.00

Board* $50.00 I/O Board $169.00

Compact Flash Card* $20.00

Total Cost $2,695.86

Parts with (*) have not been ordered and prices are approximate

Power System

Power Board Motor Driver

MotorBatteries

Physical System

FrameDrive train

Wheels

Computer Hardware

CPU

PC/104+Motor

Controller

I/O Board

Wireless PC

/104

OTH

ER I/OIMU

Wheel Encode

r

Software System

Legacy System

APIs

Drivers

Linux Kernel

Design Overview


Software OverviewSoftware System

APIs

Drivers

Linux Kernel

Legacy System

Linux Desktop

Feature-rich legacy softwareGUI for controlAI development

environmentAI run control logic for

robotAPIs called from AIAPIs call drivers for

devicesEverything run on Linux

kernel on robot


Design: LegacyAIs

Control program development environmentMakefile

ServicesHidden from programmerProcessing wireless packets, reading sensors,

motor controlCross Compilation

AIs compiled on Linux desktopCompilation flags for Atom N270


Design: Drivers, APIDrivers

Motor controllerIMUIO Board

APIMotor control

void MotorController::initMotor(struct motor_t &motor) void MotorController::setMotorSpeeds()

Sensor Manager SensorManager::init() run(float dt) readMotorEncoders(knet_dev_t *device, struct

motor_encoder_info_t &out)

Computer Hardware

CPU

PC/104+Motor

Controller

I/O Board

Wireless PC/

104

OTH

ER I/OIMU

Wheel Encod

er

Design: Computer HardwareMain System

CPU Board – Diamond Systems Pluto

Motor Controller – MESA SoftDMC Motor Controller

PeripheralI/O Board – TS ADC16IMU - Pololu CHR-6dWireless – NetGear WG111



Stack Connectors for PC104+


Design: CPU – Diamond PlutoIntel Atom N270 1.6

ETX Form Factor

USB2.0/CFII/PC104+

5v @ ~2A


Design: Peripherals I/O Board – TS ADC16

Two 16 bit ADCs at 100kHz each16 single ended, 8 differential channel

IMU – Pololu CHR-6d3 accelerometer, 3 gyro axisARM Cortex ProcessorTTL 3.3 converted to RS-232+/- 3gs of acceleration

Wireless – NetGear WG111USB2.0 Wireless G adapterLinux community driver support


Design: Motor Controller – MESA SoftDCM4I68 FPGA based

PC104-PLUS400K gate Xilinx

Spartan372 programmable I/O

bits50 Mhz crystal

oscillatorPC104+ bus

VHDL Motor Controller200k logic units


Design: Power System Power Board

Input: 6~16VOutput:

3.3V @ 2A 5V @ 4A 6~12V @ 60A

MotorsFaulhaber

2232006SR 6VDC nominal

Motor Drivers20kHz PWM2 channel 5.5-16V 0-

14ACurrent Sensing

BatteriesThunder power Li-po7.4V(2 Cell) and/or

11.1V(3 Cell)


Design: Physical SystemWheels

Similar to Wheels on Kryten (May 08 Team)Injection MoldedABS PolymerCheaply Mass Produced


Design: Physical SystemFrame

Lower COMLarger BatteryKryten & Dalec


Formation TaskGoals

Polygon shaped Obstacle avoidanceXbox controller

ApproachEach robot has target location

Offset from virtual robot based on geometric shapeFormation rotates to avoid obstaclesXbox controller, point and vector of the

formation


R

R

RRR

R

R

RR

R

R R

Triangle formation avoiding obstacle

Testing and VerificationTest cases for all requirements have been

developed.

Motor controller response characteristics

To be completed next semester


Task Breakdown – Building Bot Peter

Wheel design Power system design

Matlab Simulation Structural design

Josh Porting to legacy system SoftDMC FPGA Integration Linux

Seth Ensure documentation gets finished by deadlines Hardware Selection IO Drivers Testing legacy system integration


Task Breakdown – FormationsPeter

Robot DynamicsMatlab SimulationsResearching possible solutions to task

SethTask implementationTesting

JoshResearching possible solutions to taskTask implementation


Schedule – Spring


ID Task Name Start Finish DurationJan 2010 Feb 2010 Mar 2010 Apr 2010

3/1 10/1 17/1 24/1 31/1 7/2 14/2 21/2 28/2 7/3 14/3 21/3 28/3 4/4 11/4 18/4 25/4

1

2

3

5

4d2/16/20102/11/2010Presentation 1 – Prepare and deliver

15d3/3/20102/11/2010Project Plan

18d4/26/20104/1/2010Design Document

13d2/22/20102/4/2010Hardware Selection

4 57d4/20/20102/1/2010Legacy System Proficiency

Schedule – Fall


ID Task Name Start Finish DurationSep 2010 Oct 2010 Nov 2010

5/9 12/9 19/9 26/9 3/10 10/10 17/10 24/10 31/10 7/11 14/11 21/11

5 22d11/1/201010/1/2010Legacy Tasks Functional

6 28d11/26/201010/20/2010Testing and Verification

7 63d11/26/20109/1/2010Class presentations and artifacts

2

11d9/15/20109/1/2010Linux Functional on hardware1

8d9/10/20109/1/2010Power Board Review

4 10d10/1/20109/20/2010Robot Assembled

3 7d9/20/20109/10/2010Power Board Produced


Where We StandProficient with legacy systemMotor Controller, integrate AIsHardware

OrderedPower Board

Wheels designed, production over summer


Next SemesterBuild the Robot

Wheels, motor mounts & frame manufacturedComplete design of power systemFully assembled

IntegrationLegacy system fully functional on new robot

Testing and VerificationTest cases completed!

Formation cooperative taskAs time permits.


Q/A Session

team of omnidirectional robots for cooperative tasks

Documents