IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine JUNE 2009 1070-9932/09/$25.00a2009 IEEE 73 O ne challenge facing coordination and deployment of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) today is the amount of human involvement needed to carry out a successful mission. Currently, control and coordination of UAVs typically involves multiple operators to control a single agent. The aim of this article is to invert this relationship, enabling a single pilot to control and coordinate a group of UAVs. Furthermore, decision support is provided to the pilot to facilitate effective control of the UAV team. In the scenario envisioned in this article, the human operator (the pilot) is operating along-side a team of UAVs. The pilot communicates with the UAV team remotely and controls the UAV team to execute a surveillance mission. An important aspect of this is the question of how much the pilot should interact with the UAV team and how much aid should be provided to the pilot without overloading the pilot with data and support. We address this issue by allowing two major modes of operations, namely autonomous mode and pilot-controlled mode. In both of these modes, the UAV team is controlled in a leader–follower manner, and the leader UAV is assigned by the pilot, where the followers are positioning themselves with respect to the other UAVs in the network. In the autonomous mode, the leader UAVexecutes the mission without intervention of the pilot. At any time, the pilot is allowed to take over and directly control the leader vehicle. Hence, the pilot can interrupt the mission to investigate an area or avoid certain threats. The pilot can also release control of the UAV, and the UAV team automatically resumes the execution of the given mission. The problem of controlling multiple agents in a coordinated fashion to achieve a set of goals, such as maintaining desired formations, ensuring coverage
[1]
X.C. Ding,et al.
An optimal timing approach to controlling multiple UAVs
,
2009,
2009 American Control Conference.
[2]
M. Egerstedt,et al.
Leader-based multi-agent coordination: controllability and optimal control
,
2006,
2006 American Control Conference.
[3]
Vijay Kumar,et al.
Controlling formations of multiple mobile robots
,
1998,
Proceedings. 1998 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (Cat. No.98CH36146).
[4]
Bruce A. MacDonald,et al.
Player 2.0: Toward a Practical Robot Programming Framework
,
2008
.
[5]
Julio Rosenblatt,et al.
DAMN: a distributed architecture for mobile navigation
,
1997,
J. Exp. Theor. Artif. Intell..
[6]
Magnus Egerstedt,et al.
On-line optimization of switched-mode systems: Algorithms and convergence properties
,
2007,
2007 46th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control.
[7]
R.C. Arkin,et al.
Reactive control as a substrate for telerobotic systems
,
1991,
IEEE Aerospace and Electronic Systems Magazine.
[8]
James McLurkin,et al.
Speaking Swarmish: Human-Robot Interface Design for Large Swarms of Autonomous Mobile Robots
,
2006,
AAAI Spring Symposium: To Boldly Go Where No Human-Robot Team Has Gone Before.
[9]
Ronald C. Arkin,et al.
Cooperation without communication: Multiagent schema-based robot navigation
,
1992,
J. Field Robotics.
[10]
Magnus Egerstedt,et al.
Autonomous Formation Switching for Multiple, Mobile Robots
,
2003,
ADHS.
[11]
Magnus Egerstedt,et al.
A Modular, Hybrid System Architecture for Autonomous, Urban Driving
,
2007,
J. Aerosp. Comput. Inf. Commun..
[12]
Reza Olfati-Saber,et al.
Consensus and Cooperation in Networked Multi-Agent Systems
,
2007,
Proceedings of the IEEE.