Method and System for Multi-Mode Coverage For An Autonomous Robot
1 Assignment
0 Petitions

Accused Products

Abstract
A control system for a mobile robot (10) is provided to effectively cover a given area by operating in a plurality of modes, including an obstacle following mode (51) and a random bounce mode (49). In other embodiments, spot coverage, such as spiraling (45), or other modes are also used to increase effectiveness. In addition, a behavior based architecture is used to implement the control system, and various escape behaviors are used to ensure full coverage.
161 Citations
Method for creating spiral swath patterns for convex polygon shaped field boundaries | ||
Patent #
US 7,877,182 B2
Filed 03/23/2010
|
Current Assignee
Blue Leaf IP Incorporated
|
Original Assignee
CNH Industrial America LLC
|
Method for creating spiral swath patterns for convex polygon shaped field boundaries | ||
Patent #
US 7,715,966 B2
Filed 06/29/2009
|
Current Assignee
Blue Leaf IP Incorporated
|
Original Assignee
CNH Industrial America LLC
|
Method for Creating Spiral Swath Patterns for Convex Polygon Shaped Field Boundaries | ||
Patent #
US 20100179716A1
Filed 03/23/2010
|
Current Assignee
Blue Leaf IP Incorporated
|
Original Assignee
Blue Leaf IP Incorporated
|
Method for creating spiral swaths for irregular field boundaries | ||
Patent #
US 7,706,948 B2
Filed 03/02/2007
|
Current Assignee
Blue Leaf IP Incorporated
|
Original Assignee
CNH Industrial America LLC
|
Robot behavior control based on current and predictive internal, external condition and states with levels of activations | ||
Patent #
US 7,853,357 B2
Filed 03/09/2004
|
Current Assignee
Sony Corporation
|
Original Assignee
Sony Corporation
|
METHOD FOR CREATING SPIRAL SWATH PATTERNS FOR CONVEX POLYGON SHAPED FIELD BOUNDARIES | ||
Patent #
US 20090265053A1
Filed 06/29/2009
|
Current Assignee
Blue Leaf IP Incorporated
|
Original Assignee
Blue Leaf IP Incorporated
|
METHOD FOR CREATING SPIRAL SWATHS FOR IRREGULAR FIELD BOUNDARIES | ||
Patent #
US 20080215203A1
Filed 03/02/2007
|
Current Assignee
Blue Leaf IP Incorporated
|
Original Assignee
CNH Industrial America LLC
|
Robot device, Behavior control method thereof, and program | ||
Patent #
US 20060184273A1
Filed 03/09/2004
|
Current Assignee
Sony Corporation
|
Original Assignee
Sony Corporation
|
Automotive movable body, movable body control method and computer program | ||
Patent #
US 20050234610A1
Filed 04/07/2005
|
Current Assignee
Sanyo Electric Company Limited
|
Original Assignee
Sanyo Electric Company Limited
|
Autonomous Moving Floor-Treating Robot and Control Method Thereof for Edge-Following Floor-Treating | ||
Patent #
US 20120232696A1
Filed 07/30/2010
|
Current Assignee
Ecovacs Robotics Suzhou Co. Ltd.
|
Original Assignee
ECOVACS Robotics Co. Ltd.
|
Human-Operated Working Machine System | ||
Patent #
US 20130079905A1
Filed 06/03/2010
|
Current Assignee
Hitachi America Limited
|
Original Assignee
Hitachi America Limited
|
AUTONOMOUS ROBOT | ||
Patent #
US 20130274920A1
Filed 06/15/2013
|
Current Assignee
F Robotics Acquisitions Ltd.
|
Original Assignee
F Robotics Acquisitions Ltd.
|
Autonomous coverage robot navigation system | ||
Patent #
US 8,606,401 B2
Filed 07/01/2010
|
Current Assignee
iRobot Corporation
|
Original Assignee
iRobot Corporation
|
Autonomous floor-cleaning robot | ||
Patent #
US 8,656,550 B2
Filed 06/28/2010
|
Current Assignee
iRobot Corporation
|
Original Assignee
iRobot Corporation
|
Robot confinement | ||
Patent #
US 8,659,256 B2
Filed 06/30/2010
|
Current Assignee
iRobot Corporation
|
Original Assignee
iRobot Corporation
|
Robot confinement | ||
Patent #
US 8,659,255 B2
Filed 06/30/2010
|
Current Assignee
iRobot Corporation
|
Original Assignee
iRobot Corporation
|
Autonomous floor-cleaning robot | ||
Patent #
US 8,671,507 B2
Filed 06/28/2010
|
Current Assignee
iRobot Corporation
|
Original Assignee
iRobot Corporation
|
Autonomous moving floor-treating robot and control method thereof for edge-following floor-treating | ||
Patent #
US 8,744,628 B2
Filed 07/30/2010
|
Current Assignee
Ecovacs Robotics Suzhou Co. Ltd.
|
Original Assignee
ECOVACS Robotics Co. Ltd.
|
Autonomous floor-cleaning robot | ||
Patent #
US 8,763,199 B2
Filed 06/28/2010
|
Current Assignee
iRobot Corporation
|
Original Assignee
iRobot Corporation
|
ROBOT CLEANER | ||
Patent #
US 20140257563A1
Filed 09/05/2013
|
Current Assignee
LG Electronics Inc.
|
Original Assignee
LG Electronics Inc.
|
Method and system for multi-mode coverage for an autonomous robot | ||
Patent #
US 8,838,274 B2
Filed 06/30/2010
|
Current Assignee
iRobot Corporation
|
Original Assignee
iRobot Corporation
|
ROBOT CLEANER AND CONTROL METHOD THEREOF | ||
Patent #
US 20140283326A1
Filed 03/14/2014
|
Current Assignee
Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd.
|
Original Assignee
Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd.
|
ROBOT CLEANER AND METHOD OF OPERATING THE SAME | ||
Patent #
US 20140288709A1
Filed 08/28/2013
|
Current Assignee
LG Electronics Inc.
|
Original Assignee
LG Electronics Inc.
|
Autonomous robot | ||
Patent #
US 9,079,303 B2
Filed 06/15/2013
|
Current Assignee
F Robotics Acquisitions Ltd.
|
Original Assignee
F Robotics Acquisitions Ltd.
|
Robot cleaner and method of operating the same | ||
Patent #
US 9,180,596 B2
Filed 08/28/2013
|
Current Assignee
LG Electronics Inc.
|
Original Assignee
LG Electronics Inc.
|
Robot cleaner | ||
Patent #
US 9,271,621 B2
Filed 09/05/2013
|
Current Assignee
LG Electronics Inc.
|
Original Assignee
LG Electronics Inc.
|
WALL FOLLOWING ROBOT | ||
Patent #
US 20160296092A1
Filed 04/09/2015
|
Current Assignee
iRobot Corporation
|
Original Assignee
iRobot Corporation
|
Vehicle operating method and system | ||
Patent #
US 9,471,062 B1
Filed 12/30/2014
|
Current Assignee
Vecna Technologies Inc
|
Original Assignee
Daniel Theobald
|
PRIORITIZING CLEANING AREAS | ||
Patent #
US 20160313741A1
Filed 12/19/2013
|
Current Assignee
Aktiebolaget Electrolux
|
Original Assignee
Aktiebolaget Electrolux
|
Robot confinement | ||
Patent #
US 9,582,005 B2
Filed 02/12/2014
|
Current Assignee
iRobot Corporation
|
Original Assignee
iRobot Corporation
|
Autonomous floor-cleaning robot | ||
Patent #
US 9,622,635 B2
Filed 05/21/2014
|
Current Assignee
iRobot Corporation
|
Original Assignee
iRobot Corporation
|
Method and system for robotic surface coverage | ||
Patent #
US 9,701,020 B1
Filed 08/04/2015
|
Current Assignee
Bobsweep Inc.
|
Original Assignee
Bobsweep Inc.
|
Robotic cleaning device with perimeter recording function | ||
Patent #
US 9,811,089 B2
Filed 12/19/2013
|
Current Assignee
Aktiebolaget Electrolux
|
Original Assignee
Aktiebolaget Electrolux
|
Robot cleaner and control method thereof | ||
Patent #
US 9,854,956 B2
Filed 03/14/2014
|
Current Assignee
Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd.
|
Original Assignee
Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd.
|
Wall following robot | ||
Patent #
US 9,877,630 B2
Filed 11/19/2015
|
Current Assignee
iRobot Corporation
|
Original Assignee
iRobot Corporation
|
Wall following robot | ||
Patent #
US 9,918,605 B2
Filed 04/09/2015
|
Current Assignee
iRobot Corporation
|
Original Assignee
iRobot Corporation
|
Robot positioning system | ||
Patent #
US 9,939,529 B2
Filed 08/23/2013
|
Current Assignee
Aktiebolaget Electrolux
|
Original Assignee
Aktiebolaget Electrolux
|
Prioritizing cleaning areas | ||
Patent #
US 9,946,263 B2
Filed 12/19/2013
|
Current Assignee
Aktiebolaget Electrolux
|
Original Assignee
Aktiebolaget Electrolux
|
Robotic vacuum cleaner with side brush moving in spiral pattern | ||
Patent #
US 10,045,675 B2
Filed 12/19/2013
|
Current Assignee
Aktiebolaget Electrolux
|
Original Assignee
Aktiebolaget Electrolux
|
Sensing climb of obstacle of a robotic cleaning device | ||
Patent #
US 10,149,589 B2
Filed 12/19/2013
|
Current Assignee
Aktiebolaget Electrolux
|
Original Assignee
Aktiebolaget Electrolux
|
Autonomous traveling body | ||
Patent #
US 10,201,261 B2
Filed 04/22/2015
|
Current Assignee
Toshiba Lifestyle Products Services Corporation
|
Original Assignee
Toshiba Lifestyle Products Services Corporation
|
Robotic cleaning device | ||
Patent #
US 10,209,080 B2
Filed 12/19/2013
|
Current Assignee
Aktiebolaget Electrolux
|
Original Assignee
Aktiebolaget Electrolux
|
Robotic vacuum cleaner with protruding sidebrush | ||
Patent #
US 10,219,665 B2
Filed 04/15/2013
|
Current Assignee
Aktiebolaget Electrolux
|
Original Assignee
Aktiebolaget Electrolux
|
Dust container | ||
Patent #
US 10,231,591 B2
Filed 12/20/2013
|
Current Assignee
Aktiebolaget Electrolux
|
Original Assignee
Aktiebolaget Electrolux
|
METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR ROBOTIC SURFACE COVERAGE | ||
Patent #
US 20190094870A1
Filed 11/21/2018
|
Current Assignee
Ai Incorprated
|
Original Assignee
Ai Incorprated
|
System for operating mobile robot based on complex map information and operating method thereof | ||
Patent #
US 10,335,949 B2
Filed 01/19/2017
|
Current Assignee
Yujin Robot Co. Ltd.
|
Original Assignee
Yujin Robot Co. Ltd.
|
Method and system for robotic surface coverage | ||
Patent #
US 10,343,280 B1
Filed 06/10/2017
|
Current Assignee
Bobsweep Inc.
|
Original Assignee
Bobsweep Inc.
|
Vacuum cleaner | ||
Patent #
US 10,398,273 B2
Filed 08/17/2015
|
Current Assignee
Toshiba Lifestyle Products Services Corporation
|
Original Assignee
Toshiba Lifestyle Products Services Corporation
|
Adaptive speed control of rotating side brush | ||
Patent #
US 10,433,697 B2
Filed 12/19/2013
|
Current Assignee
Aktiebolaget Electrolux
|
Original Assignee
Aktiebolaget Electrolux
|
Robotic vacuum cleaner | ||
Patent #
US 10,448,794 B2
Filed 04/15/2013
|
Current Assignee
Aktiebolaget Electrolux
|
Original Assignee
Aktiebolaget Electrolux
|
Methods and systems for robotic surface coverage | ||
Patent #
US 10,488,865 B2
Filed 11/21/2018
|
Current Assignee
Al Inc.
|
Original Assignee
Al Inc.
|
Robotic vacuum cleaner | ||
Patent #
US 10,499,778 B2
Filed 09/08/2014
|
Current Assignee
Aktiebolaget Electrolux
|
Original Assignee
Aktiebolaget Electrolux
|
Method for detecting a measurement error in a robotic cleaning device | ||
Patent #
US 10,518,416 B2
Filed 12/17/2014
|
Current Assignee
Aktiebolaget Electrolux
|
Original Assignee
Aktiebolaget Electrolux
|
Experience-based roadmap for a robotic cleaning device | ||
Patent #
US 10,534,367 B2
Filed 12/16/2014
|
Current Assignee
Aktiebolaget Electrolux
|
Original Assignee
Aktiebolaget Electrolux
|
Wall following robot | ||
Patent #
US 10,537,221 B2
Filed 02/07/2018
|
Current Assignee
iRobot Corporation
|
Original Assignee
iRobot Corporation
|
Robotic cleaning device and method for landmark recognition | ||
Patent #
US 10,617,271 B2
Filed 12/19/2013
|
Current Assignee
Aktiebolaget Electrolux
|
Original Assignee
Aktiebolaget Electrolux
|
Cleaning method for a robotic cleaning device | ||
Patent #
US 10,678,251 B2
Filed 12/16/2014
|
Current Assignee
Aktiebolaget Electrolux
|
Original Assignee
Aktiebolaget Electrolux
|
Robotic vacuum cleaner | ||
Patent #
US 10,729,297 B2
Filed 09/08/2014
|
Current Assignee
Aktiebolaget Electrolux
|
Original Assignee
Aktiebolaget Electrolux
|
Application of localization, positioning and navigation systems for robotic enabled mobile products | ||
Patent #
US 10,730,397 B2
Filed 07/05/2017
|
Current Assignee
iRobot Corporation
|
Original Assignee
iRobot Corporation
|
Dirtiness level determining system and surface cleaning machine | ||
Patent #
US 10,732,127 B2
Filed 12/26/2018
|
Current Assignee
PixArt Imaging Incorporated
|
Original Assignee
PixArt Imaging Incorporated
|
System of robotic cleaning devices | ||
Patent #
US 10,874,274 B2
Filed 09/03/2015
|
Current Assignee
Aktiebolaget Electrolux
|
Original Assignee
Aktiebolaget Electrolux
|
Side brush and robotic cleaner | ||
Patent #
US 10,874,271 B2
Filed 12/12/2014
|
Current Assignee
Aktiebolaget Electrolux
|
Original Assignee
Aktiebolaget Electrolux
|
Using laser sensor for floor type detection | ||
Patent #
US 10,877,484 B2
Filed 12/10/2014
|
Current Assignee
Aktiebolaget Electrolux
|
Original Assignee
Aktiebolaget Electrolux
|
Method and System for Multi-Mode Coverage For An Autonomous Robot | ||
Patent #
US 20100049365A1
Filed 10/30/2009
|
Current Assignee
iRobot Corporation
|
Original Assignee
iRobot Corporation
|
Robot cleaner | ||
Patent #
US 7,650,666 B2
Filed 09/04/2006
|
Current Assignee
KYUNGMIN MECHATRONICS CO. LTD.
|
Original Assignee
KYUNGMIN MECHATRONICS CO. LTD.
|
Obstacle sensing system for an autonomous cleaning apparatus | ||
Patent #
US 7,647,144 B2
Filed 02/25/2002
|
Current Assignee
Aktiebolaget Electrolux
|
Original Assignee
Aktiebolaget Electrolux
|
REMOVING DEBRIS FROM CLEANING ROBOTS | ||
Patent #
US 20100011529A1
Filed 05/21/2007
|
Current Assignee
iRobot Corporation
|
Original Assignee
iRobot Corporation
|
Self-propelled working robot having horizontally movable work assembly retracting in different speed based on contact sensor input on the assembly | ||
Patent #
US 7,660,650 B2
Filed 10/05/2004
|
Current Assignee
Figla Co. Ltd.
|
Original Assignee
Figla Co. Ltd.
|
Robot cleaner | ||
Patent #
US 7,474,941 B2
Filed 07/12/2004
|
Current Assignee
Samsung Gwangju Electronics Co. Ltd.
|
Original Assignee
Samsung Gwangju Electronics Co. Ltd.
|
Coverage Robot Mobility | ||
Patent #
US 20090007366A1
Filed 09/17/2008
|
Current Assignee
iRobot Corporation
|
Original Assignee
iRobot Corporation
|
OBSTACLE FOLLOWING SENSOR SCHEME FOR A MOBILE ROBOT | ||
Patent #
US 20090055022A1
Filed 05/23/2008
|
Current Assignee
iRobot Corporation
|
Original Assignee
iRobot Corporation
|
Robot cleaner system having robot cleaner and docking station | ||
Patent #
US 20090049640A1
Filed 04/30/2008
|
Current Assignee
Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd.
|
Original Assignee
Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd.
|
Debris Sensor for Cleaning Apparatus | ||
Patent #
US 20090038089A1
Filed 10/21/2008
|
Current Assignee
iRobot Corporation
|
Original Assignee
iRobot Corporation
|
Robotic extraction cleaner with dusting pad | ||
Patent #
US 7,320,149 B1
Filed 11/21/2003
|
Current Assignee
Bissell Inc.
|
Original Assignee
Bissell Homecare Inc.
|
Autonomous robot auto-docking and energy management systems and methods | ||
Patent #
US 20080007203A1
Filed 12/29/2006
|
Current Assignee
iRobot Corporation
|
Original Assignee
iRobot Corporation
|
Cleaning robot and control method thereof | ||
Patent #
US 7,324,870 B2
Filed 06/29/2004
|
Current Assignee
Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd.
|
Original Assignee
Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd.
|
Cleaner having structures for jumping obstacles | ||
Patent #
US 7,318,248 B1
Filed 11/13/2006
|
Current Assignee
Hunan Grand-Pro Robot Technology Co.Ltd.
|
Original Assignee
Jason Yan
|
Architecture for multiple interacting robot intelligences | ||
Patent #
US 7,328,196 B2
Filed 12/31/2003
|
Current Assignee
Vanderbilt University
|
Original Assignee
Vanderbilt University
|
Robot Confinement | ||
Patent #
US 20080039974A1
Filed 03/19/2007
|
Current Assignee
iRobot Corporation
|
Original Assignee
iRobot Corporation
|
Autonomous robot auto-docking and energy management systems and methods | ||
Patent #
US 7,332,890 B2
Filed 01/21/2004
|
Current Assignee
iRobot Corporation
|
Original Assignee
iRobot Corporation
|
Robotic vacuum cleaner | ||
Patent #
US 7,167,775 B2
Filed 12/04/2001
|
Current Assignee
F Robotics Acquisitions Ltd.
|
Original Assignee
F Robotics Acquisitions Ltd.
|
Mobile robot using image sensor and method for measuring moving distance thereof | ||
Patent #
US 7,171,285 B2
Filed 10/31/2003
|
Current Assignee
LG Electronics Inc.
|
Original Assignee
LG Electronics Inc.
|
STEERING CONTROL SENSOR FOR AN AUTOMATIC VACUUM CLEANER | ||
Patent #
US 20070017061A1
Filed 07/20/2005
|
Current Assignee
Jason Yan
|
Original Assignee
Jason Yan
|
Remote control sweeper | ||
Patent #
US 20070006404A1
Filed 07/08/2005
|
Current Assignee
GUTEN ELECTRONICS INDUSTRIAL LTD.
|
Original Assignee
Gooten Innolife Corporation
|
Mobile robotic system with web server and digital radio links | ||
Patent #
US 7,174,238 B1
Filed 09/02/2003
|
Current Assignee
Stephen Eliot Zweig
|
Original Assignee
Stephen Eliot Zweig
|
DUST COLLECTOR FOR AUTONOMOUS FLOOR-CLEANING DEVICE | ||
Patent #
US 20070028574A1
Filed 08/02/2005
|
Current Assignee
Jason Yan
|
Original Assignee
Jason Yan
|
Storing and recalling information to augment human memories | ||
Patent #
US 20070043459A1
Filed 07/19/2006
|
Current Assignee
Microsoft Technology Licensing LLC
|
Original Assignee
Tangis Corporation
|
Automatic radio site survey using a robot | ||
Patent #
US 20070042716A1
Filed 08/19/2005
|
Current Assignee
Cisco Technology Incorporated
|
Original Assignee
Cisco Technology Incorporated
|
Self-propelled working robot | ||
Patent #
US 20070032904A1
Filed 10/05/2004
|
Current Assignee
Figla Co. Ltd.
|
Original Assignee
Figla Co. Ltd.
|
Robot vacuum cleaner | ||
Patent #
US 20060020369A1
Filed 06/30/2005
|
Current Assignee
Sharper Image Acquisition LLC
|
Original Assignee
Sharper Image Acquisition LLC
|
System and method for confining a robot | ||
Patent #
US 20060020370A1
Filed 07/21/2005
|
Current Assignee
F Robotics Acquisitions Ltd.
|
Original Assignee
F Robotics Acquisitions Ltd.
|
Hard floor cleaner | ||
Patent #
US 20060000050A1
Filed 07/01/2004
|
Current Assignee
Royal Appliance Manufacturing Company
|
Original Assignee
Royal Appliance Manufacturing Company
|
Cleaner | ||
Patent #
US 20060010638A1
Filed 07/13/2005
|
Current Assignee
Sanyo Electric Company Limited
|
Original Assignee
Sanyo Electric Company Limited
|
Method of communicating data in a wireless mobile communication system | ||
Patent #
US 20060025134A1
Filed 06/24/2005
|
Current Assignee
LG Electronics Inc.
|
Original Assignee
LG Electronics Inc.
|
Self-propelling cleaner | ||
Patent #
US 20060037170A1
Filed 02/10/2005
|
Current Assignee
Funai Electric Co. Ltd.
|
Original Assignee
Funai Electric Co. Ltd.
|
Self-traveling cleaner | ||
Patent #
US 20060021168A1
Filed 07/26/2005
|
Current Assignee
Sanyo Electric Company Limited
|
Original Assignee
Sanyo Electric Company Limited
|
Robot cleaner, system thereof and method for controlling same | ||
Patent #
US 6,841,963 B2
Filed 02/20/2002
|
Current Assignee
Samsung Gwangju Electronics Co. Ltd.
|
Original Assignee
Samsung Gwangju Electronics Co. Ltd.
|
Autonomous machine for docking with a docking station and method for docking | ||
Patent #
US 20050010330A1
Filed 07/11/2003
|
Current Assignee
F Robotics Acquisitions Ltd.
|
Original Assignee
F Robotics Acquisitions Ltd.
|
Robot cleaner | ||
Patent #
US 20050021181A1
Filed 07/12/2004
|
Current Assignee
Samsung Gwangju Electronics Co. Ltd.
|
Original Assignee
Samsung Gwangju Electronics Co. Ltd.
|
Robot cleaner, robot cleaning system and method of controlling same | ||
Patent #
US 20040016077A1
Filed 03/28/2003
|
Current Assignee
Samsung Gwangju Electronics Co. Ltd.
|
Original Assignee
Samsung Gwangju Electronics Co. Ltd.
|
Methods and apparatus for decision making of system of mobile robotic vehicles | ||
Patent #
US 20040030451A1
Filed 04/22/2003
|
Current Assignee
Solomon Research LLC
|
Original Assignee
Neal Solomon
|
System, methods and apparatus for leader-follower model of mobile robotic system aggregation | ||
Patent #
US 20040030570A1
Filed 04/22/2003
|
Current Assignee
Solomon Research LLC
|
Original Assignee
Solomon Research LLC
|
Robot moving on legs and control method therefor, and relative movement measuring sensor for robot moving on legs | ||
Patent #
US 20030009259A1
Filed 03/04/2002
|
Current Assignee
Sony Corporation
|
Original Assignee
Sony Corporation
|
Autonomous mobile apparatus for performing work within a predefined area | ||
Patent #
US 20030023356A1
Filed 09/13/2002
|
Current Assignee
LOGICAL TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED
|
Original Assignee
LOGICAL TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED
|
Robot touch shield | ||
Patent #
US 20030030399A1
Filed 10/13/2001
|
Current Assignee
Diversey Incorporated
|
Original Assignee
Axxon Robotics LLC
|
Ultra-wideband enhanced robot and method for controlling the robot | ||
Patent #
US 20030028286A1
Filed 06/04/2001
|
Current Assignee
Humatics Corporation
|
Original Assignee
Time Domain Corporation
|
Molded imager optical package and miniaturized linear sensor-based code reading engines | ||
Patent #
US 20030024986A1
Filed 06/15/2001
|
Current Assignee
Symbol Technologies LLC
|
Original Assignee
Symbol Technologies Inc.
|
Method for operating a robot | ||
Patent #
US 6,339,735 B1
Filed 12/29/1998
|
Current Assignee
F Robotics Acquisitions Ltd.
|
Original Assignee
Friendly Robotics Ltd
|
Autonomously navigating robot system | ||
Patent #
US 20020011367A1
Filed 07/27/2001
|
Current Assignee
Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft zur Forderung der angewandten Forschung e.V.
|
Original Assignee
Gmd-Forschungszentrum Informaionstechnik Gmgh
|
Animal collar including tracking and location device | ||
Patent #
US 20020021219A1
Filed 08/03/2001
|
Current Assignee
TIME-N-SPACE TECHNOLOGY INC.
|
Original Assignee
TIME-N-SPACE TECHNOLOGY INC.
|
Robot obstacle detection system | ||
Patent #
US 20020016649A1
Filed 01/24/2001
|
Current Assignee
iRobot Corporation
|
Original Assignee
iRobot Corporation
|
Mobile unit and controller for mobile unit | ||
Patent #
US 6,025,687 A
Filed 09/24/1998
|
Current Assignee
Moneual Incorporated
|
Original Assignee
Minolta Corporation Limited
|
Extractor with twin, counterrotating agitators | ||
Patent #
US 6,030,465 A
Filed 12/17/1998
|
Current Assignee
Panasonic Corporation Of North America
|
Original Assignee
Matsushita Electric Corporation Of America
|
Method for diagnosing, cleaning and preserving carpeting and other fabrics | ||
Patent #
US 6,030,464 A
Filed 01/28/1998
|
Current Assignee
PACIFIC SPECIALTY CHEMICAL INC.
|
Original Assignee
PACIFIC SPECIALTY CHEMICAL INC.
|
Vacuum cleaner | ||
Patent #
US 6,023,814 A
Filed 09/15/1997
|
Current Assignee
Yashima Electric Co. Ltd.
|
Original Assignee
Yashima Electric Co. Ltd.
|
Powered floor scrubber and buffer | ||
Patent #
US 6,023,813 A
Filed 04/07/1998
|
Current Assignee
Spectrum Products Incorporated
|
Original Assignee
Spectrum Products Incorporated
|
Vacuum cleaner attachment for the wet cleaning of surfaces | ||
Patent #
US 6,021,545 A
Filed 10/20/1997
|
Current Assignee
Vorwerk Company Interholding Gesellschaft Mit BeschrNkter Haftung
|
Original Assignee
Vorwerk Company Interholding Gesellschaft Mit BeschrNkter Haftung
|
Upright vacuum cleaner with full bag and clogged filter indicators thereon | ||
Patent #
US 6,026,539 A
Filed 03/04/1998
|
Current Assignee
Bissell Homecare Inc.
|
Original Assignee
Bissell Homecare Inc.
|
Power supply system for self-contained mobile robots | ||
Patent #
US 5,869,910 A
Filed 07/29/1997
|
Current Assignee
Solar Robotics SA
|
Original Assignee
Andre Colens
|
Lead acid charger | ||
Patent #
US 5,710,506 A
Filed 02/07/1995
|
Current Assignee
Benchmarq Microelectronics Inc.
|
Original Assignee
Benchmarq Microelectronics Inc.
|
Position detecting system | ||
Patent #
US 5,717,484 A
Filed 03/17/1995
|
Current Assignee
Moneual Incorporated
|
Original Assignee
Minolta Corporation Limited
|
Method and apparatus for inspecting well bore casing | ||
Patent #
US 5,717,169 A
Filed 08/26/1996
|
Current Assignee
Schlumberger Technology Corporation
|
Original Assignee
Schlumberger Technology Corporation
|
Running robot carrying out prescribed work using working member and method of working using the same | ||
Patent #
US 5,720,077 A
Filed 05/26/1995
|
Current Assignee
Minolta Corporation Limited
|
Original Assignee
Minolta Corporation Limited
|
Sterilizer | ||
Patent #
US 5,714,119 A
Filed 03/24/1995
|
Current Assignee
Yoshihiro Kiuchi
|
Original Assignee
Minolta Corporation Limited, Yoshihiro Kiuchi, Kiyoyuki Takesako
|
System and method for sonic positioning | ||
Patent #
US 5,491,670 A
Filed 07/21/1994
|
Current Assignee
Weber T. Jerome
|
Original Assignee
Weber T. Jerome
|
Self-aligning inductive charger | ||
Patent #
US 5,498,948 A
Filed 10/14/1994
|
Current Assignee
GM Global Technology Operations LLC
|
Original Assignee
Delco Electronics Corporation
|
Pneumatic tire having improved wet traction | ||
Patent #
US 5,386,862 A
Filed 08/18/1994
|
Current Assignee
Goodyear Tire Rubber Company
|
Original Assignee
Goodyear Tire Rubber Company
|
Doorway transit navigational referencing system | ||
Patent #
US 5,276,618 A
Filed 02/26/1992
|
Current Assignee
the united states of america as represented by the secretary of the navy
|
Original Assignee
the united states of america as represented by the secretary of the navy
|
Thick film accelerometer | ||
Patent #
US 5,277,064 A
Filed 04/08/1992
|
Current Assignee
General Motors Corporation
|
Original Assignee
General Motors Corporation, Delco Electronics Corporation
|
Electric vacuum cleaner with suction power responsive to nozzle conditions | ||
Patent #
US 5,276,939 A
Filed 02/12/1992
|
Current Assignee
Sanyo Electric Company Limited
|
Original Assignee
Sanyo Electric Company Limited
|
Mooring buoy with hawser tension indicator system | ||
Patent #
US 5,284,452 A
Filed 01/15/1993
|
Current Assignee
Atlantic Richfield Company Incorporated
|
Original Assignee
Atlantic Richfield Company Incorporated
|
Vacuum cleaner | ||
Patent #
US 5,182,833 A
Filed 05/03/1990
|
Current Assignee
Matsushita Electric Industrial Company Limited
|
Original Assignee
Matsushita Electric Industrial Company Limited
|
Vacuum cleaners | ||
Patent #
US 5,084,934 A
Filed 04/29/1991
|
Current Assignee
Black Decker Incorporated
|
Original Assignee
Black Decker Incorporated
|
Detonator actuator | ||
Patent #
US 5,090,321 A
Filed 11/09/1988
|
Current Assignee
ICI Australia Limited
|
Original Assignee
ICI Australia Limited
|
Limited mobility transporter | ||
Patent #
US 5,094,311 A
Filed 02/22/1991
|
Current Assignee
Fanuc Robotics America Incorporated
|
Original Assignee
GMFANUC ROBOTICS CORPORATION
|
Method and apparatus for determining the position of a mobile body | ||
Patent #
US 4,986,663 A
Filed 12/20/1989
|
Current Assignee
SOCIETA CAVI PIRELLI S.P.A. A CORP. OF ITALY
|
Original Assignee
SOCIETA CAVI PIRELLI S.P.A.
|
Vehicle | ||
Patent #
US 5,001,635 A
Filed 12/27/1988
|
Current Assignee
Sanyo Electric Company Limited
|
Original Assignee
Sanyo Electric Company Limited
|
Method and apparatus for tracking, mapping and recognition of spatial patterns | ||
Patent #
US 4,891,762 A
Filed 02/09/1988
|
Current Assignee
Nicholas P. Chotiros
|
Original Assignee
Nicholas P. Chotiros
|
One dimensional image visual system for a moving vehicle | ||
Patent #
US 4,905,151 A
Filed 03/07/1988
|
Current Assignee
TRANSITIONS RESEARCH CORPORATION
|
Original Assignee
TRANSITIONS RESEARCH CORPORATION
|
Code wheel for a reflective type optical rotary encoder | ||
Patent #
US 4,806,751 A
Filed 06/29/1988
|
Current Assignee
ALPS Electric Company Limited
|
Original Assignee
ALPS Electric Company Limited
|
Automatic guided vehicle system | ||
Patent #
US 4,817,000 A
Filed 03/10/1986
|
Current Assignee
SI Handling Systems Inc.
|
Original Assignee
SI Handling Systems Inc.
|
Pivotable running toy | ||
Patent #
US 4,813,906 A
Filed 11/25/1987
|
Current Assignee
Tomy Kogyo Co. Inc.
|
Original Assignee
Tomy Kogyo Co. Inc.
|
Light scattering smoke detector having conical and concave surfaces | ||
Patent #
US 4,728,801 A
Filed 05/07/1986
|
Current Assignee
THORN EMI PROTECH LIMITED
|
Original Assignee
THORN EMI PROTECH LIMITED
|
Machine tool numerical controller with a trouble stop function | ||
Patent #
US 4,733,343 A
Filed 02/12/1986
|
Current Assignee
Toyoda Koki Kabushiki Kaisha
|
Original Assignee
Toyoda Koki Kabushiki Kaisha
|
Autonomous mobile robot | ||
Patent #
US 4,638,445 A
Filed 06/08/1984
|
Current Assignee
Paul J. Mattaboni
|
Original Assignee
Paul J. Mattaboni
|
Code wheel for reflective optical rotary encoders | ||
Patent #
US 4,644,156 A
Filed 01/17/1985
|
Current Assignee
ALPS Electric Company Limited
|
Original Assignee
ALPS Electric Company Limited
|
Optical position and orientation measurement techniques | ||
Patent #
US 4,649,504 A
Filed 05/22/1984
|
Current Assignee
CAE USA Incorporated
|
Original Assignee
CAE USA Incorporated
|
Remote attitude sensor using single camera and spiral patterns | ||
Patent #
US 4,652,917 A
Filed 08/10/1984
|
Current Assignee
Honeywell Incorporated
|
Original Assignee
Honeywell Incorporated
|
Switch drive | ||
Patent #
US 4,654,492 A
Filed 04/12/1985
|
Current Assignee
BBC AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT BROWN BOVERI CIE
|
Original Assignee
BBC AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT BROWN BOVERIE CIE
|
Distance measuring device | ||
Patent #
US 4,575,211 A
Filed 04/16/1984
|
Current Assignee
Canon Kabushiki Kaisha
|
Original Assignee
Canon Kabushiki Kaisha
|
Ultracompact miniature toy vehicle with four-wheel drive and unusual climbing capability | ||
Patent #
US 4,492,058 A
Filed 09/13/1982
|
Current Assignee
Adolph E. Goldfarb
|
Original Assignee
Adolph E. Goldfarb
|
Array positioning system with out-of-focus solar cells | ||
Patent #
US 4,367,403 A
Filed 08/11/1981
|
Current Assignee
RCA Corporation
|
Original Assignee
RCA Corporation
|
Driverless vehicle autoguided by light signals and three non-directional detectors | ||
Patent #
US 4,309,758 A
Filed 08/01/1979
|
Current Assignee
Imperial Chemical Industries Limited
|
Original Assignee
Imperial Chemical Industries Limited
|
Combination dust container for vacuum cleaner and signalling device | ||
Patent #
US 4,070,170 A
Filed 08/18/1976
|
Current Assignee
Aktiebolaget Electrolux
|
Original Assignee
Aktiebolaget Electrolux
|
Scrubbing unit for vehicle-washing station | ||
Patent #
US 4,004,313 A
Filed 09/08/1975
|
Current Assignee
Ceccato C. S.p.A.
|
Original Assignee
CECCATO C. S.P.A.
|
Battery control system for battery operated vehicles | ||
Patent #
US 4,012,681 A
Filed 01/03/1975
|
Current Assignee
Curtis Instruments Incorporated
|
Original Assignee
Curtis Instruments Incorporated
|
CONTROL MEANS FOR PULSE GENERATING APPARATUS | ||
Patent #
US 3,569,727 A
Filed 09/30/1968
|
Current Assignee
UNISON INDUSTRIES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP 530 BLACKHAWK PARK AVE. ROCKFORD ILLINOIS 61108 A DE. LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
|
Original Assignee
Louis H. Segall, Aggarwal Rattan
|
CARPET SWEEPER | ||
Patent #
US 3,863,285 A
Filed 07/05/1973
|
Current Assignee
KABUSHIKI KAISHA HOKY
|
Original Assignee
Hiroshi Hukuba
|
Orientation sensing means comprising photodetectors and projected fans of light | ||
Patent #
US 3,375,375 A
Filed 01/08/1965
|
Current Assignee
Honeywell Incorporated
|
Original Assignee
Robert Abbey, David S. Lane
|
Device for indicating fluid flow | ||
Patent #
US 3,119,369 A
Filed 12/28/1960
|
Current Assignee
Harry W. Hoff Jr, Philip W. Harland
|
Original Assignee
Harry W. Hoff Jr, Philip W. Harland
|
Stair climbing conveyance | ||
Patent #
US 3,166,138 A
Filed 10/26/1961
|
Current Assignee
Edward D. Dunn Jr
|
Original Assignee
Edward D. Dunn Jr
|
21 Claims
-
1-2. -2. (canceled)
-
3. A mobile robot, comprising:
-
a drive mechanism that both drives the robot forward in a drive direction and turns the robot to change the drive direction;
a sensor responsive to proximity of an object to be followed on a lateral side of the robot;
a floor area cleaning mechanism disposed on the lateral side of the robot; and
a drive controller that controls the drive mechanism to follow the object on the lateral side of the robot, by monitoring the sensor to detect when the object is no longer proximate the lateral side of the robot; and
,in response to detecting that the object is no longer proximate the lateral side, turning the robot toward the lateral side while decreasing a turning radius of the robot. - View Dependent Claims (4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11)
-
-
12. A mobile robot, comprising:
-
a drive mechanism that both drives the robot forward in a drive direction and turns the robot to change the drive direction;
a forward obstacle sensor responsive to objects encountered by the robot while moving in the drive direction;
a side sensor positioned to detect proximity of objects on a dominant side of the robot, transverse to the drive direction;
a floor area cleaning mechanism disposed on the dominant side of the robot; and
a drive controller that controls the drive mechanism to turn the robot, in response to detection of an object by the forward obstacle sensor, until proximity of the detected object on the dominant side of the robot is indicated by the side sensor, and then to drive the robot in the drive direction. - View Dependent Claims (13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20)
-
-
21. A mobile robot, comprising:
-
a robot housing;
a drive mechanism that both drives the robot housing forward in a drive direction and turns the robot housing to change the drive direction;
a bump sensor responsive to the robot bumping into an object in the drive direction;
a sensor responsive to proximity of a wall to be followed on a lateral side of the robot housing;
a side brush extending beyond a lateral extent of the housing, the side brush driven to sweep debris from a floor surface beyond the lateral extent of the housing, for collection by the robot; and
a drive controller that controls the drive mechanism to follow the wall on the lateral side of the robot, by monitoring the sensor to detect when the wall is no longer proximate the lateral side of the robot; and
in response to detecting that the wall is no longer proximate the lateral side, turning the robot toward the lateral side while decreasing a turning radius of the robot until the sensor detects a wall on the lateral side.
-
1 Specification
This application for United States patent is a continuation of, and claims priority from, U.S patent application Ser. No. 10/187,851 filed Jun. 12, 2002, entitled Method and System for Multi-Mode Coverage for an Autonomous Robot, and related U.S. Provisional Application for Patent Ser. No. 60/297,718 filed Jun. 12, 2001.
This invention relates generally to autonomous vehicles or robots, and more specifically to methods and mobile robotic devices for covering a specific area as might be required of, or used as, robotic cleaners or lawn mowers.
For purposes of this description, examples will focus on the problems faced in the prior art as related to robotic cleaning (e.g., dusting, buffing, sweeping, scrubbing, dry mopping or vacuuming). The claimed invention, however, is limited only by the claims themselves, and one of skill in the art will recognize the myriad of uses for the present invention beyond indoor, domestic cleaning.
Robotic engineers have long worked on developing an effective method of autonomous cleaning. By way of introduction, the performance of cleaning robots should concentrate on three measures of success: coverage, cleaning rate and perceived effectiveness. Coverage is the percentage of the available space visited by the robot during a fixed cleaning time, and ideally, a robot cleaner would provide 100 percent coverage given an infinite run time. Unfortunately, designs in the prior art often leave portions of the area uncovered regardless of the amount of time the device is allowed to complete its tasks. Failure to achieve complete coverage can result from mechanical limitations—e.g., the size and shape of the robot may prevent it from reaching certain areas—or the robot may become trapped, unable to vary its control to escape. Failure to achieve complete coverage can also result from an inadequate coverage algorithm. The coverage algorithm is the set of instructions used by the robot to control its movement. For the purposes of the present invention coverage is discussed as a percentage of the available area visited by the robot during a finite cleaning time. Due to mechanical and/or algorithmic limitations, certain areas within the available space may be systematically neglected. Such systematic neglect is a significant limitation in the prior art.
A second measure of a cleaning robot'"'"'s performance is the cleaning rate given in units of area cleaned per unit time. Cleaning rate refers to the rate at which the area of cleaned floor increases; coverage rate refers to the rate at which the robot covers the floor regardless of whether the floor was previously clean or dirty. If the velocity of the robot is v and the width of the robot'"'"'s cleaning mechanism (also called work width) is w then the robots coverage rate is simply wv, but its cleaning rate may be drastically lower.
A robot that moves in a purely randomly fashion in a closed environment has a cleaning rate that decreases relative to the robot'"'"'s coverage rate as a function of time. This is because the longer the robot operates the more likely it is to revisit already cleaned areas. The optimal design has a cleaning rate equivalent to the coverage rate, thus minimizing unnecessary repeated cleanings of the same spot. In other words, the ratio of cleaning rate to coverage rate is a measure of efficiency and an optimal cleaning rate would mean coverage of the greatest percentage of the designated area with the in minimum number of cumulative or redundant passes over an area already cleaned.
A third metric cleaning robot performance is the perceived effectiveness of the robot. This measure is ignored in the prior art. Deliberate movement and certain patterned movement is favored as users will perceive a robot that contains deliberate movement as more effective.
While coverage, cleaning rate and perceived effectiveness are the performance criteria discussed herein, a preferred embodiment of the present invention also takes into account the ease of use in rooms of a variety of shapes and sizes (containing a variety of unknown obstacles) and the cost of the robotic components. Other design criteria may also influence the design, for example the need for collision avoidance and appropriate response to other hazards.
As described in detail in Jones, Flynn & Seiger, Mobile Robots: Inspiration to Implementation second edition, 1999, A K Peters, Ltd., and elsewhere, numerous attempts have been made to build vacuuming and cleaning robots. Each of these robots has faced a similar challenge: how to efficiently cover the designated area given limited energy reserves.
We refer to maximally efficient cleaning, where the cleaning rate equals the coverage rate, as deterministic cleaning. As shown in
One example of using highly sophisticated (and expensive) sensor technologies to create deterministic cleaning is the RoboScrub device built by Denning Mobile Robotics and Windsor Industries, which used sonar, infrared detectors, bump sensors and high-precision laser navigation. RoboScrub'"'"'s navigation system required attaching large bar code targets at various positions in the room. The requirement that RoboScrub be able to see at least four targets simultaneously was a significant operational problem. RoboScrub, therefore, was limited to cleaning large open areas.
Another example, RoboKent, a robot built by the Kent Corporation, follows a global positioning strategy similar to RobotScrub. RoboKent dispenses with RobotScrub'"'"'s more expensive laser positioning system but having done so RoboKent must restrict itself only to areas with a simple rectangular geometry, e.g., long hallways. In these more constrained regions, position correction by sonar ranging measurements is sufficient. Other deterministic cleaning systems are described, for example, in U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,119,900 (Kremnitz) 4,700,427 (Knepper) 5,353,224 (Lee et al.) , 5,537,017 (Feiten et al.), 5,548,511 (Bancroft), 5,650,702 (Azumi).
Because of the limitations and difficulties of deterministic cleaning some robots have relied on pseudo-deterministic schemes. One method of providing pseudo-deterministic cleaning is an autonomous navigation method known as dead reckoning. Dead reckoning consists of measuring the precise rotation of each robot drive wheel (using for example optical shaft encoders). The robot can then calculate its expected position in the environment given a known starting point and orientation. One problem with this technique is wheel slippage. If slippage occurs, the encoder on that wheel registers a wheel rotation even though that wheel is not driving the robot relative to the ground. As shown in
One example of a pseudo-deterministic a system is the Cye robot from Probotics, Inc. Cye depends exclusively on dead reckoning and therefore takes heroic measures to maximize the performance of its dead reckoning system. Cye must begin at a user-installed physical registration spot in a known location where the robot fixes its position and orientation. Cye then keeps track of position as it moves away from that spot. As Cye moves, uncertainty in its position and orientation increase. Cye must make certain to return to a calibration spot before this error grows so large that it will be unlikely to locate a calibration spot. If a calibration spot is moved or blocked or if excessive wheel slippage occurs then Cye can become lost (possibly without realizing that it is lost). Thus Cye is suitable for use only in relatively small benign environments. Other examples of this approach are disclosed it U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,109,566 Kobayashi et al.) and 6,255,793 (Peless et al.).
Another approach to robotic cleaning is purely random motion. As shown in
The coverage limitations of a random algorithm can be seen in
As discussed, the commercially available prior art has not been able to produce an effective coverage algorithm for an area of unknown geometry. As noted above, the prior art either has relied on sophisticated systems of markers or beacons or has limited the utility of the robot to rooms with simple rectangular geometries. Attempts to use pseudo-deterministic control algorithms can leave areas of the space systematically neglected.
It is an object of the present invention to provide a system, and method to allow a mobile robot to operate in a plurality of modes in order to effectively cover an area.
It is an object of the present invention to provide a mobile robot, with at least one sensor, to operate in a number of modes including spot-coverage, obstacle following and bounce.
It is a further object of the invention to provide a mobile robot that alternates between obstacle following and bounce mode to ensure coverage.
It is an object of the invention to return to spot-coverage after the robot has traveled a pre-determined distance.
It is an object of the invention to provide a mobile robot able to track the average distance between obstacles and use the average distance as an input to alternate between operational modes.
It is yet another object of the invention to optimize the distance the robot travels in an obstacle following mode as a function of the frequency of obstacle following and the work width of the robot, and to provide a minimum and maximum distance for operating in obstacle following mode.
It is an object of a preferred embodiment of the invention to use a control system for a mobile robot with an operational system program able to run a plurality of behaviors and using an arbiter to select which behavior is given control over the robot.
It is still another object of the invention to incorporate various escape programs or behavior to allow the robot to avoid becoming stuck.
Finally, it is an object of the invention to provide one or more methods for controlling a mobile robot to benefit from the various objects and advantages disclosed herein.
These and further features of the present invention will be apparent with reference to the accompanying drawings, wherein:
FIGS. 1A-D illustrate coverage patterns of various robots in the prior art;
In the present invention, a mobile robot is designed to provide maximum coverage at an effective coverage rate in a room of unknown geometry. In addition, the perceived effectiveness of the robot is enhanced by the inclusion of patterned or deliberate motion. In addition, in a preferred embodiment, effective coverage requires a control system able to prevent the robot from becoming immobilized in an unknown environment.
While the physical structures of mobile robots are known in the art, the components of a preferred, exemplary embodiment of the present invention is described herein. A preferred embodiment of the present invention is a substantially circular robotic sweeper containing certain features. As shown in
A preferred embodiment of the robot also contains two wheels 20, motors 21 for driving the wheels independently, an inexpensive low-end microcontroller 22, and a rechargeable battery 23 or other power source known in the art. These components are well known in the art and are not discussed in detail herein. The robotic cleaning device 10 further includes one or more cleaning heads 30. The cleaning head might contain a vacuum cleaner, various brushes, sponges, mops, electrostatic cloths or a combination of various cleaning elements. The embodiment shown in
As mentioned above, a preferred embodiment of the robotic cleaning device 10 comprises an outer shell 15 defining a dominant side, non-dominant side, and a front portion of the robot 10. The dominant side of the robot is the side that is kept near or in contact with an object (or obstacle) when the robot cleans the area adjacent to that object (or obstacle). In a preferred embodiment, as shown in
In a preferred embodiment, two bump sensors 12 & 13 are located forward of the wheels 20 relative to the direction of forward movement, shown by arrow 40. One bump sensor 13 is located on the dominant side of the robot 10 and the other bump sensor 12 is located on the non-dominant side of the robot 10. When both of these bump sensors 12 & 13 are activated simultaneously, the robot 10 recognizes an obstacle in the front position. In other embodiments, more or fewer individual bump sensors can be used. Likewise, any number of bump sensors can be used to divide the device into any number of radial segments. While in a preferred embodiment the bump sensors 12 & 13 are IR break beam sensors activated by contact between the robot 10 and an obstacle, other types of sensors can be used, including mechanical switches and capacitive sensors that detect the capacitance of objects touching the robot or between two metal plates in the bumper that are compressed on contact. Non-contact sensors, which allow the robot to sense proximity to objects without physically touching the object, such as capacitive sensors or a curtain of IR light, can also be used.
It is useful to have a sensor or sensors that are not only able to tell if a surface has been contacted (or is nearby), but also the angle relative to the robot at which the contact was made. In the case of a preferred embodiment, the robot is able to calculate the time between the activation of the right and left bump switches 12 & 13, if both are activated. The robot is then able to estimate the angle at which contact was made. In a preferred embodiment shown in
For example, in
A preferred embodiment also contains a wall-following or wall-detecting sensor 16 mounted on the dominant side of the robot 10. In a preferred embodiment, the wall following sensor is an IR sensor composed of an emitter and detector pair collimated so that a finite volume of intersection occurs at the expected position of the wall. This focus point is approximately three inches ahead of the drive wheel in the direction of robot forward motion. The radial range of wall detection is about 0.75 inches.
A preferred embodiment also contains any number of IR cliff sensors 14 that prevent the device from tumbling over stairs or other vertical drops. These cliff sensors are of a construction similar to that of the wall following sensor but directed to observe the floor rather than a wall. As an additional safety and sensing measure, the robot 10 includes a wheel-drop sensor that is able to detect if one or more wheels is unsupported by the floor. This wheel-drop sensor can therefore detect not only cliffs but also various obstacles upon which the robot is able to drive, such as lamps bases, high floor transitions, piles of cords, etc.
Other embodiments may use other known sensors or combinations of sensors.
The I/O ports of the microprocessor are connected to the sensors and motors of the robot and are the interface connecting it to the internal state of the robot and its environment. For example, the wheel drop sensors are connected to an input port and the brush motor PWM signal is generated on an output port. The ROM on the microprocessor is used to store the coverage and control program, for the robot. This includes the behaviors (discussed below), sensor processing algorithms and signal generation. The RAM is used to store the active state of the robot, such as the average bump distance, run time and distance, and the ID of the behavior in control and its current motor commands.
For purposes of understanding the movement of the robotic device,
Also, in certain embodiments, the robot may include one or more user inputs. For example, as shown in
As mentioned above, the exemplary robot is a preferred embodiment for practicing the instant invention, and one of skill in the art is able to choose from elements known in the art to design a robot for a particular purpose. Examples of suitable designs include those described in the following U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,306,329 (Yokoi), 5,109,566 (Kobayashi et al.), 5,203,955 (Lee), 5,369,347 (Yoo), 5,440,216 (Kim), 5,534,762 (Kim), 5,613,261 (Kawakami et al), 5,634,237 (Paranjpe), 5,781,960 (Kilstrom et al.), 5,787,545 (Colens), 5,815,880 (Nakanishi), 5,839,156 (Park et al.), 5,926,909 (McGee), 6,038,501 (Kawakami) 6,076,226 (Reed), all of which are hereby incorporated by reference.
The coverage robot of the instant invention uses these various operational modes to effectively cover the area. While one of skill in the art may implement these various operational modes in a variety of known architectures, a preferred embodiment relies on behavior control. Here, behaviors are simply layers of control systems that all run in parallel. The microcontroller 22 then runs a prioritized arbitration scheme to resolve the dominant behavior for a given scenario. A description of behavior control can be found in Mobile Robots, supra, the text of which is hereby incorporated by reference.
In other words, in a preferred embodiment, the robot'"'"'s microprocessor and control software run a number of behaviors simultaneously. Depending on the situation, control of the robot will be given to one or more various behaviors. For purposes of detailing the preferred operation of the present invention, the behaviors will be described as (1) coverage behaviors, (2) escape behaviors or (3) user/safety behaviors. Coverage behaviors are primarily designed to allow the robot to perform its coverage operation in an efficient manner. Escape behaviors are special behaviors that are given priority when one or more sensor inputs suggest that the robot may not be operating freely. As a convention for this specification, behaviors discussed below are written in all capital letters.
1. Coverage Behaviors
Operational Mode: Spot Coverage
Spot coverage or, for example, spot cleaning allows the user to clean an isolated dirty area. The user places the robot 10 on the floor near the center of the area (see reference numeral 40 in
In a preferred embodiment, the method of achieving spot cleaning is a control algorithm providing outward spiral movement, or SPIRAL behavior, as shown in
The method of spot cleaning used in a preferred embodiment—outward spiraling—is set forth in
where d is the distance between two consecutive passes of the spiral. For effective cleaning, a value for d should be chosen that is less than the width of the cleaning mechanism 30. In a preferred embodiment, a value of d is selected that is between one-half and two-thirds of the width of the cleaning head 30.
In other embodiments, the robot tracks its total distance traveled in spiral mode. The spiral will deteriorate after some distance, i.e. the centerpoint of the spiral motion will tend to drift over time due to surface dependant wheel slippage and/or inaccuracies in the spiral approximation algorithm and calculation precision. In certain embodiments, therefore, the robot may exit spiral mode after the robot has traveled a specific distance (“maximum spiral distance”), such as 6.3 or 18.5 meters (step 240). In a preferred embodiment, the robot uses multiple maximum spiral distances depending on whether the robot is performing an initial spiral or a later spiral. If the maximum spiral distance is reached without a bump, the robot gives control to a different behavior, and the robot, for example, then continues to move in a predominately straight line. (In a preferred embodiment, a STRAIGHT LINE behavior is a low priority, default behavior that propels the robot in an approximate straight line at a preset velocity of approximately 0.306 m/s when no other behaviors are active.
In spiral mode, various actions can be taken when an obstacle is encountered. For example, the robot could (a) seek to avoid the obstacle and continue the spiral in the counter-clockwise direction, (b) seek to avoid the obstacle and continue the spiral in the opposite direction (e.g. changing from counter-clockwise to clockwise), or (c) change operational modes. Continuing the spiral in the opposite direction is known as reflective spiraling and is represented in
While a preferred embodiment describes a spiral motion for spot coverage, any self-bounded area can be used, including but not limited to regular polygon shapes such as squares, hexagons, ellipses, etc.
Operational Mode: Wall/Obstacle Following
Wall following or, in the case of a cleaning robot, edge cleaning, allows the user to clean only the edges of a room or the edges of objects within a room. The user places the robot 10 on the floor near an edge to be cleaned and selects the edge-cleaning operational mode. The robot 10 then moves in such a way that it follows the edge and cleans all areas brought into contact with the cleaning head 30 of the robot.
The movement of the robot 10 in a room 110 is shown in
In a preferred embodiment, in the wall-following mode, the robot uses the wall-following sensor 16 to position itself a set distance from the wall. The robot then proceeds to travel along the perimeter of the wall. As shown in
The method used in a preferred embodiment for following the wall is detailed in
Once the wall-following operational mode, or WALL FOLLOWING behavior of a preferred embodiment, is initiated (step 301), the robot first sets its initial value for the steering at r0. The WALL-FOLLOWING behavior then initiates the emit-detect routine in the wall-follower sensor 16 (step 310). The existence of a reflection for the IR transmitter portion of the sensor 16 translates into the existence of an object within a predetermined distance from the sensor 16. The WALL-FOLLOWING behavior then determines whether there has been a transition from a reflection (object within range) to a non-reflection (object outside of range) (step 320). If there has been a transition (in other words, the wall is now out of range), the value of r is set to its most negative value and the robot will veer slightly to the right (step 325). The robot then begins the emit-detect sequence again (step 310). If there has not been a transition from a reflection to a non-reflection, the wall-following behavior then determines whether there has been a transition from non-reflection to reflection (step 330). If there has been such a transition, the value of r is set to its most positive value and the robot will veer slightly left (step 335).
In the absence of either type of transition event, the wall-following behavior reduces the absolute value of r (step 340) and begins the emit-detect sequence (step 310) anew. By decreasing the absolute value of r, the robot 10 begins to turn more sharply in whatever direction it is currently heading. In a preferred embodiment, the rate of decreasing the absolute value of r is a constant rate dependant on the distance traveled.
The wall follower mode can be continued for a predetermined or random time, a predetermined or random distance or until some additional criteria are met (e.g. bump sensor is activated, etc.). In one embodiment, the robot continues to follow the wall indefinitely. In a preferred embodiment, as shown in
Theoretically, the optimal distance for the robot to travel in WALL-FOLLOWING behavior is a function of room size and configuration and robot size. In a preferred embodiment, the minimum and maximum distances to remain in WALL-FOLLOWING are set based upon the approximate room size, the robots width and a random component, where by the average minimum travel distance is 2 w/p, where w, is the width of the work element of the robot and p is the probability that the robot will enter WALL-FOLLOWING behavior in a given interaction with an obstacle. By way of example, in a preferred embodiment, w is approximately between 15 cm and 25 cm, and p is 0.095 (where the robot encounters 6 to 15 obstacles, or an average of 10.5 obstacles, before entering an obstacle following mode). The minimum distance is then set randomly as a distance between approximately 115 cm and 350 cm; the maximum distance is then set randomly as a distance between approximately 170 cm and 520 cm. In certain embodiments the ratio between the minimum distance to the maximum distance is 2:3. For the sake of perceived efficiency, the robot'"'"'s initial operation in a obstacle following mode can be set to be longer than its later operations in obstacle following mode. In addition, users may place the robot along the longest wall when starting the robot, which improves actual as well as perceived coverage.
The distance that the robot travels in wall following mode can also be set by the robot depending on the number and frequency of objects encountered (as determined by other sensors), which is a measure of room “clutter.” If more objects are encountered, the robot would wall follow for a greater distance in order to get into all the areas of the floor. Conversely, if few obstacles are encountered, the robot would wall follow less in order to not over-cover the edges of the space in favor of passes through the center of the space. An initial wall-following distance can also be included to allow the robot to follow the wall a longer or shorter distance during its initial period where the WALL-FOLLOWING behavior has control.
In a preferred embodiment, the robot may also leave wall-following mode if the robot turns more than, for example, 270 degrees and is unable to locate the wall (or object) or if the robot has turned a total of 360 degrees since entering wall-following mode.
In certain embodiments, when the WALL-FOLLOWING behavior is active and there is a bump, the ALIGN behavior becomes active. The ALIGN behavior turns the robot counter-clockwise to align the robot with the wall. The robot always turns a minimum angle to avoid getting the robot getting into cycles of many small turns. After it has turned through its minimum angle, the robot monitors its wall sensor and if it detects a wall and then the wall detection goes away, the robot stops turning. This is because at the end of the wall follower range, the robot is well aligned to start WALL-FOLLOWING. If the robot has not seen its wall detector go on and then off by the time it reaches its maximum angle, it stops anyway. This prevents the robot from turning around in circles when the wall is out of range of its wall sensor. When the most recent bump is within the side 60 degrees of the bumper on the dominant side, the minimum angle is set to 14 degrees and the maximum angle is 19 degrees. Otherwise, if the bump is within 30 degrees of the front of the bumper on the dominant side or on the non-dominant side, the minimum angle is 20 degrees and the maximum angle is 44 degrees. When the ALIGN behavior has completed turning, it cedes control to the WALL-FOLLOWING behavior
Operational Mode: Room Coverage
The third operational mode is here called room-coverage or room cleaning mode, which allows the user to clean any area bounded by walls, stairs, obstacles or other barriers. To exercise this option, the user places the robot on the floor and selects room-cleaning mode. The robot them moves about the room cleaning all areas that it is able to reach.
In a preferred embodiment, the method of performing the room cleaning behavior is a BOUNCE behavior in combination with the STRAIGHT LINE behavior. As shown in
The algorithm for random bounce behavior is set forth in
The statistics of the heading choice made by the robot can be distributed uniformly across the allowed headings, i.e. there is an equivalent chance for any heading within the acceptable range. Alternately we can choose statistics based on a Gaussian or other distribution designed to preferentially drive the robot perpendicularly away from a wall.
In other embodiments, the robot could change directions at random or predetermined times and not based upon external sensor activity. Alternatively, the robot could continuously make small angle corrections based on long range sensors to avoid even contacting an object and, thereby cover the surface area with curved paths
In a preferred embodiment, the robot stays in room-cleaning mode until a certain number of bounce interactions are reached, usually between 6 and 13.
2. Escape Behaviors
There are several situations the robot may encounter while trying to cover an area that prevent or impede it from covering all of the area efficiently. A general class of sensors and behaviors called escape behaviors are designed to get the robot out of these situations, or in extreme cases to shut the robot off if it is determined it cannot escape. In order to decide whether to give an escape behavior priority among the various behaviors on the robot, the robot determines the following: (1) is an escape behavior needed; (2) if yes, which escape behavior is warranted?
By way of example, the following situations illustrate situations where an escape behavior is needed for an indoor cleaning robot and an appropriate behavior to run:
- (i) Situation 1. The robot detects a situation where it might get stuck—for example, a high spot in a carpet or near a lamp base that acts like a ramp for the robot. The robot performs small “panic” turn behaviors to get out of the situation;
- (ii) Situation 2. The robot is physically stuck—for example, the robot is wedged under a couch or against a wall, tangled in cords or carpet tassels, or stuck on a pile of electrical cords with its wheels spinning. The robot performs large panic turn behaviors and turns off relevant motors to escape from the obstruction;
- (iii) Situation 3. The robot is in a small, confined area—for example, the robot is between the legs of a chair or in the open area under a dresser, or in a small area created by placing a lamp close to the corner of a room. The robot edge follows using its bumper and/or performs panic turn behaviors to escape from the area; and
- (iv) Situation 4. The robot has been stuck and cannot free itself—for example, the robot is in one of the cases in category (ii), above, and has not been able to free itself with any of its panic behaviors. In this case, the robot stops operation and signals to the user for help. This preserves battery life and prevents damage to floors or furniture.
In order to detect the need for each escape situation, various sensors are used. For example:
- (i) Situation 1. (a) When the brush or side brush current rise above a threshold, the voltage applied to the relevant motor is reduced. Whenever this is happening, a stall rate variable is increased. When the current is below the threshold, the stall rate is reduced. If the stall level rises above a low threshold and the slope of the rate is positive, the robot performs small panic turn behaviors. It only repeats these small panic turn behaviors when the level has returned to zero and risen to the threshold again. (b) Likewise, there is a wheel drop level variable which is increased when a wheel drop event is detected and is reduced steadily over time. When a wheel drop event is detected and the wheel drop level is above a threshold (meaning there have been several wheel drops recently), the robot performs small or large panic turn behaviors depending on the wheel drop level.
- (ii) Situation 2. (a) When the brush stall rate rises above a high threshold and the slope is positive, the robot turns off the brush for 13 seconds and performs large panic turn behaviors at 1, 4, and 7 seconds. At the end of the 13 seconds, the brush is turned back on. (b) When the drive stall rate rises above a medium threshold and the slope is positive, the robot performs large panic turn behaviors continuously. (c) When the drive stall rate rises above a high threshold, the robot turns off all of the motors for 15 seconds. At the end of the 15 seconds, the motors are turned back on. (d) When the bumper of the robot is held in constantly for 5 seconds (as in a side wedging situation), the robot performs a large panic turn behavior. It repeats the panic turn behavior every 5 seconds until the bumper is released. (e) When the robot has gotten no bumps for a distance of 20 feet, it assumes that it might be stuck with its wheels spinning. To free itself, it performs a spiral. If has still not gotten a bump for 10 feet after the end of the spiral, performs a large panic turn behavior. It continues this every 10 feet until it gets a bump.
- (iii) Situation 3. (a) When the average distance between bumps falls below a low threshold, the robot performs edge following using its bumper to try to escape from the confined area. (b) When the average distance between bumps falls below a very low threshold, the robot performs large panic turn behaviors to orient it so that it may better be able to escape from the confined area.
- (iv) Situation 4. (a) When the brush has stalled and been turned off several times recently and the brush stall rate is high and the slope is positive, the robot shuts off. (b) When the drive has stalled and the motors turned off several times recently and the drive stall rate is high and the slope is positive, the robot shuts off. (c) When any of the wheels are dropped continuously for greater than 2 seconds, the robot shuts off. (d) When many wheel drop events occur in a short time, the robot shuts off. (e) When any of the cliff sensors sense a cliff continuously for 10 seconds, the robot shuts off. (f) When the bump sensor is constantly depressed for a certain amount of time, for example 10 seconds, it is likely that the robot is wedged, and the robot shuts off.
As a descriptive example,
If, however, the rate is above 2400 (step 410) and the slope is positive (step 412), the robot will run a special set of escape behaviors shown in
A preferred embodiment of the robot has four escape behaviors: TURN, EDGE, WHEEL DROP and SLOW.
- TURN. The robot turns in place in a random direction, starting at a higher velocity (approximately twice of its normal turning velocity) and decreasing to a lower velocity (approximately one-half of its normal turning velocity). Varying the velocity may aid the robot in escaping from various situations. The angle that the robot should turn can be random or a function of the degree of escape needed or both. In a preferred embodiment, in low panic situations the robot turns anywhere from 45 to 90 degrees, and in high panic situations the robot turns anywhere from 90 to 270 degrees.
- EDGE. The robot follows the edge using its bump sensor until (a) the robot turns 60 degrees without a bump or (b) the robot cumulatively has turned more than 170 degrees since the EDGE behavior initiated. The EDGE behavior may be useful if the average bump distance is low (but not so low as to cause a panic behavior). The EDGE behavior allows the robot to fit through the smallest openings physically possible for the robot and so can allow the robot to escape from confined areas.
- WHEEL DROP. The robot back drives wheels briefly, then stops them. The back driving of the wheels helps to minimize false positive wheel drops by giving the wheels a small kick in the opposite direction. If the wheel drop is gone within 2 seconds, the robot continues normal operation.
- SLOW. If a wheel drop or a cliff detector goes off, the robot slows down to speed of 0.235 m/s (or 77% of its normal speed) for a distance of 0.5 m and then ramps back up to its normal speed.
In addition to the coverage behaviors and the escape behaviors, the robot also might contain additional behaviors related to safety or usability. For example, if a cliff is detected for more than a predetermined amount of time, the robot may shut off. When a cliff is first detected, a cliff avoidance response behavior takes immediate precedence over all other behaviors, rotating the robot away from the cliff until the robot no longer senses the cliff. In a preferred embodiment, the cliff detection event does not cause a change in operational modes. In other embodiments, the robot could use an algorithm similar to the wall-following behavior to allow for cliff following.
The individual operation of the three operational modes has been described above; we now turn to the preferred mode of switching between the various modes.
In order to achieve the optimal coverage and cleaning efficiency, a preferred embodiment uses a control program that gives priority to various coverage behaviors. (Escape behaviors, if needed, are always given a higher priority.) For example, the robot 10 may use the wall following mode for a specified or random time period and then switch operational modes to the room cleaning. By switching between operational modes, the robotic device of the present invention is able to increase coverage, cleaning efficiency and perceived effectiveness.
By way of example,
Finally, a preferred embodiment of the present invention is detailed in
In a preferred embodiment, the device then switches between wall following mode (movement lines 51) and random bounce modes (movement lines 48) based on bump sensor events or the completion of the wall following algorithm. In one embodiment, the device does not return to spiral mode; in other embodiments, however, the device can enter spiral mode based on a predetermined or random event.
In a preferred embodiment, the robot keeps a record of the average distance traveled between bumps. The robot then calculates an average bump distance (ABD) using the following formula: (¾×ABD)+(¼×most recent distance between bumps). If the ABD is a above a predetermined threshold, the robot will again give priority to the SPIRAL behavior. In still other embodiments, the robot may have a minimum number of bump events before the SPIRAL behavior will again be given priority. In other embodiments, the robot may enter SPIRAL behavior if it travels a maximum distance, for example 20 feet, without a bump event.
In addition, the robot can also have conditions upon which to stop all operations. For example, for a given room size, which can be manually selected, a minimum and maximum run time are set and a minimum total distance is selected. When the minimum time and the minimum distance have been reached the robot shuts off. Likewise, if the maximum time has been reached, the robot shuts off.
Of course, a manual control for selecting between operational modes can also be used. For example, a remote control could be used to change or influence operational modes or behaviors. Likewise, a switch mounted on the shell itself could be used to set the operation mode or the switching between modes. For instance, a switch could be used to set the level of clutter in a room, to allow the robot a more appropriate coverage algorithm with limited sensing ability.
One of skill in the art will recognize that portions of the instant invention can be used in autonomous vehicles for a variety of purposes besides cleaning. The scope of the invention should be determined by the appended claims and their legal equivalents, rather than by the examples given.