Nonconservativity and noncommutativity in locomotion

Geometric mechanics techniques based on Lie brackets provide high-level characterizations of the motion capabilities of locomoting systems. In particular, they relate the net displacement they experience over cyclic gaits to area integrals of their constraints; plotting these constraints thus provides a visual “landscape” that intuitively captures all available solutions of the system’s dynamic equations. Recently, we have found that choices of system coordinates heavily influence the effectiveness of these approaches. This property appears at first to run counter to the principle that differential geometric structures should be coordinate-invariant. In this paper, we provide a tutorial overview of the Lie bracket techniques, then examine how the coordinate-independent nonholonomy of these systems has a coordinate-dependent separation into nonconservative and noncommutative components that respectively capture how the system constraints vary over the shape and position components of the configuration space. Nonconservative constraint variations can be integrated geometrically via Stokes’ theorem, but noncommutative effects can only be approximated by similar means; therefore choices of coordinates in which the nonholonomy is primarily nonconservative improve the accuracy of the geometric techniques.

[1]  W. Magnus On the exponential solution of differential equations for a linear operator , 1954 .

[2]  G. Arfken Mathematical Methods for Physicists , 1967 .

[3]  Ralph Abraham,et al.  Foundations Of Mechanics , 2019 .

[4]  W. Boothby An introduction to differentiable manifolds and Riemannian geometry , 1975 .

[5]  Frank Wilczek,et al.  Gauge kinematics of deformable bodies , 1989 .

[6]  F. Wilczek,et al.  Geometry of self-propulsion at low Reynolds number , 1989, Journal of Fluid Mechanics.

[7]  M. Santander,et al.  The Chinese South‐Seeking chariot: A simple mechanical device for visualizing curvature and parallel transport , 1992 .

[8]  S. Sastry,et al.  Nonholonomic motion planning: steering using sinusoids , 1993, IEEE Trans. Autom. Control..

[9]  P. Krishnaprasad,et al.  G-snakes: nonholonomic kinematic chains on Lie groups , 1994, Proceedings of 1994 33rd IEEE Conference on Decision and Control.

[10]  Richard M. Murray,et al.  A Mathematical Introduction to Robotic Manipulation , 1994 .

[11]  Richard M. Murray,et al.  Geometric phases and robotic locomotion , 1995, J. Field Robotics.

[12]  Joel W. Burdick,et al.  The Geometric Mechanics of Undulatory Robotic Locomotion , 1998, Int. J. Robotics Res..

[13]  Vijay Kumar,et al.  Optimal Gait Selection for Nonholonomic Locomotion Systems , 2000, Int. J. Robotics Res..

[14]  Andrew D. Lewis,et al.  Simple mechanical control systems with constraints , 2000, IEEE Trans. Autom. Control..

[15]  P. Krishnaprasad,et al.  Oscillations, SE(2)-snakes and motion control: A study of the Roller Racer , 2001 .

[16]  Kevin M. Lynch,et al.  Kinematic controllability for decoupled trajectory planning in underactuated mechanical systems , 2001, IEEE Trans. Robotics Autom..

[17]  James P. Ostrowski,et al.  Motion planning for anguilliform locomotion , 2003, IEEE Trans. Robotics Autom..

[18]  A. D. Lewis,et al.  Geometric Control of Mechanical Systems , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control.

[19]  Mrinal K. Mandal,et al.  Efficient Hodge-Helmholtz decomposition of motion fields , 2005, Pattern Recognit. Lett..

[20]  A. D. Lewis,et al.  Geometric control of mechanical systems : modeling, analysis, and design for simple mechanical control systems , 2005 .

[21]  Clarence W. Rowley,et al.  Motion Planning for an Articulated Body in a Perfect Planar Fluid , 2006, SIAM J. Appl. Dyn. Syst..

[22]  Howie Choset,et al.  Towards a Unified Approach to Motion Planning for Dynamic Underactuated Mechanical Systems with Non-holonomic Constraints , 2007, Int. J. Robotics Res..

[23]  Howie Choset,et al.  Geometric Motion Planning Analysis for Two Classes of Underactuated Mechanical Systems , 2007, Int. J. Robotics Res..

[24]  Kristi A. Morgansen,et al.  Geometric Methods for Modeling and Control of Free-Swimming Fin-Actuated Underwater Vehicles , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Robotics.

[25]  Howie Choset,et al.  Approximating displacement with the body velocity integral , 2009, Robotics: Science and Systems.

[26]  Howie Choset,et al.  Optimizing coordinate choice for locomoting systems , 2010, 2010 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[27]  Howie Choset,et al.  Geometric motion planning: The local connection, Stokes’ theorem, and the importance of coordinate choice , 2011, Int. J. Robotics Res..

[28]  Howie Choset,et al.  Geometric visualization of self-propulsion in a complex medium. , 2013, Physical review letters.

[29]  Howie Choset,et al.  Geometric Swimming at Low and High Reynolds Numbers , 2013, IEEE Transactions on Robotics.