2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.automatica.2017.08.020
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Semi-analytical minimum time solutions with velocity constraints for trajectory following of vehicles

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
18
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

2
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 40 publications
(18 citation statements)
references
References 38 publications
0
18
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This approach has a three-level structure which combines triangular decomposition, Dijkstra's algorithm, and a proposed particle swarm optimization called constrained multi-objective particle swarm optimization. In Reference [28], to find an optimal maneuver that moves a car-like vehicle between two configurations in minimum time, a two-phase algorithm firstly solves a geometric optimization problem and then finds the optimal maneuver with system dynamics and its constraints satisfied.…”
Section: Hierarchical Path Planningmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This approach has a three-level structure which combines triangular decomposition, Dijkstra's algorithm, and a proposed particle swarm optimization called constrained multi-objective particle swarm optimization. In Reference [28], to find an optimal maneuver that moves a car-like vehicle between two configurations in minimum time, a two-phase algorithm firstly solves a geometric optimization problem and then finds the optimal maneuver with system dynamics and its constraints satisfied.…”
Section: Hierarchical Path Planningmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We specify exactly the BCs of problem P3, that is, we fix the initial point, angle and curvature, or ( x 0 , y 0 ), θ 0 and κ 0 , and the final point ( x 1 , y 1 ); the algorithm to solve P3 finds κ and the length L , such that the connection exhibits G 2 continuity. There is then a slave algorithm that computes the optimal speed profile of the obtained spline and returns the value to the master algorithm that decides whether this trajectory is good or not; eventually, the segment is rejected and another point is tested. We did a numeric simulation of the time‐optimal path on the tracks of Monza and Silverstone (see Figure ) with the optimal control solver PINS .…”
Section: Numerical Testsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this case, the solver is slowed down or does not converge at all. Restriction (11) is not a real limitation, however. The parameters passed to IPOPT are a tolerance of 10 −10 , the analytic gradient of the constraints, and the Hessian approximated with the limited memory BFGS.…”
Section: Numerical Testsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…All these blocks are used inside a high‐level optimiser that constructs the trajectory of the carlike vehicle along a sequence of given points. ()…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…All these blocks are used inside a high-level optimiser that constructs the trajectory of the carlike vehicle along a sequence of given points. 4,27,28 In this work, we focus on the fast and accurate numerical computation of the analytic solution of an OCP arising from a Riccati dynamical system. We remark, since the limit of the lateral acceleration is a function of the state only (and not of the control variable) that we can solve the complete problem in 2 phases.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%