Apparatus and method of distributing object handling

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 6278907
  • Patent Number
    6,278,907
  • Date Filed
    Wednesday, November 24, 1999
    25 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, August 21, 2001
    23 years ago
Abstract
A modular object handling system has a multi-level control architecture, which includes a system controller that coordinates the functions and/or operations of individual module controllers, that in turn control corresponding actuators, to provide a desired system function. The system controller performs the overall trajectory planning by taking the constraints of each of the module actuators into account. The system controller may compensate for deviations of objects from their planned trajectories by contemporaneously redetermining trajectories and trajectory envelopes to encode the various combinations of the system constraints and task requirements. The trajectory envelopes can denote regions around other trajectories to indicate control criteria of interest, such as control and collision boundaries. However, by predetermining the trajectories and trajectory envelopes, and comparing the current state of an object with the predetermined trajectory envelopes, the system controller can even more quickly determine the extent to which the state satisfies the criteria. Thus, this system simplifies on-line determinations to merely include a comparison between a particular object, a particular trajectory and the corresponding trajectory envelope. It is also desirable to predetermine multiple trajectories, as well as trajectory envelopes associated with each of the multiple trajectories, for each object. The apparatus and methods of the invention can then monitor the status of each object, and switch between the multiple predetermined trajectories in order to actively improve energy usage efficiency. The apparatus and methods can also modify the trajectories of other objects to avoid collisions with the object whose trajectory was originally switched.
Description




BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION




1. Field of Invention




This invention is directed to apparatus and methods of distributed object handling.




2. Description of the Related Art




A traditional media handling system can move media, such as a sheet, from one location to another location along a path, while performing one or more operations on the sheet, such as inversion, image transfer or fusing. As shown in

FIG. 1

, a traditional media handling system


100


includes a controller


110


that controls multiple actuators


130


, which perform operations on the sheet while moving the sheet along a paper path


140


.




Typically, timing signals are used to coordinate the operations and sheet movement. For example, the sheet can be fed into the path


140


at a certain time according to a timing signal. The sheet can then move through the path


140


, past various position sensors within a certain time window, and arrive at a transfer station at a specific time.




SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION




However, this traditional media handling system


100


is subject to the problem that when any temporal error in the operations beyond a certain tolerance is detected and flagged to the controller


110


, the machine containing the traditional media handling system


100


is shut down. The traditional media handling system


100


does not include any feedback control. Thus, the actuators


130


need to be precisely manufactured, which is expensive. Also, because of this lack of feedback control, the traditional media handling system


100


does not perform well when subjected to different types of media, and has problems maintaining accuracy and reliability at high speeds.




A modular object handling system can overcome these problems via a more control-centric design, which can be accomplished by adding more controls. The use of control strategies, beyond the simple timing of the traditional media handling system


100


, can also allow a wider range of objects, such as a wider range of media types, to be handled at higher speeds.




For example, a modular object handling system that includes a multi-level control architecture can provide advantages over the traditional media handling system


100


discussed above. This modular object handling system can include a system controller that coordinates the functions and/or the operations of individual module controllers, which in turn control corresponding actuators, to provide a desired system function, such as transporting objects along a path. In particular, the system controller can download an overall trajectory for each object to the module controllers. The module controllers can control their respective actuators to maintain each object on its planned trajectory while in that module.




The system controller performs the overall trajectory planning by taking the constraints of each of the module actuators into account. The trajectories planned by the system controller can then be provided as functions in distance-time space, such as cubic splines.




Deviations from an object's desired trajectory typically occur during the operation of the modular object handling system. For minor deviations, all control can be left to the individual module controllers, since they may not be concerned with other module controllers or whether the overall control criteria are satisfied. However, the system controller is concerned with satisfying the overall control criteria. Thus, the system controller may constantly monitor the location of the objects and contemporaneously redetermine the objects' trajectories using various control techniques to make up for such deviations.




However, continuously replanning trajectories by accessing complex trajectory re-determining techniques can be difficult to accomplish in real time. In fact, depending on the equipment and software involved, it may be necessary to resort to approximate determinations and heuristics to identify the effects of deviations and to replan the deviating trajectories in real time.




Thus, instead of continuously replanning the deviating trajectories, it may be desirable to use predetermined trajectories and trajectory envelopes to encode the various combinations of system constraints and task requirements. The trajectory envelopes can denote regions around other trajectories to indicate control criteria of interest, such as control and collision boundaries. By comparing the current state of an object with the predetermined trajectory envelopes, the system controller can quickly determine the extent to which the current state satisfies the control criteria.




For example, instead of continuously checking the distance between objects and re-determining the trajectories to avoid collisions, a predetermined collision envelope around the desired trajectory can be used. The predetermined collision envelopes are determined such that, as long as the objects are within their collision envelopes, the objects will not collide. A control envelope can similarly be used to determine other control criteria, such as whether the object will reach its target on time to accomplish a task requirement. This modular object handling system simplifies on-line determinations to merely include a comparison between a particular trajectory and the corresponding trajectory envelope, or between a current object position and a trajectory envelope.




The systems and methods discussed above predetermine a trajectory, as well as well as at least one predetermined trajectory envelope that is associated with the trajectory, for each object moving along the path. However, if the predetermined trajectory envelope is large and/or an the object deviates a large amount from the predetermined trajectory, then an unnecessarily large amount of energy may be exerted in attempting to place that object back on that object's predetermined trajectory.




To avoid this, multiple trajectories, as well as trajectory envelopes associated with each of the multiple trajectories, can be determined for each object. The apparatus and methods of the invention can then monitor the status of each object, and switch between the multiple predetermined trajectories in order to actively improve energy usage efficiently. The apparatus and methods can also modify the trajectories of other objects to avoid collisions with the object whose trajectory was originally switched.




These and other features and advantages of this invention are described in or are apparent from the following detailed description of various exemplary embodiments of the systems and methods according to this invention.











BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS




Various exemplary embodiments of systems and methods according to this invention will be described in detail, with reference to the following figures, wherein:





FIG. 1

is a block diagram of a traditional media handling system;





FIG. 2

is a block diagram of a modular object handling system in accordance with the invention;





FIG. 3

is a graph that shows a typical time-distance nominal trajectory;





FIG. 4

is a graph showing trajectories and trajectory envelopes for sample system and task constraints;





FIG. 5

is a flowchart outlining one exemplary embodiment of a method for using predetermined trajectories and trajectory envelopes in system level control of a multi-level modular object handling system;





FIG. 6

is a flowchart outlining in greater detail one exemplary embodiment of a method for determining if the object is within its collision envelope of step S


1200


of

FIG. 5

;





FIG. 7

is a flowchart outlining in greater detail one exemplary embodiment of a method for determining if the object is within its control envelope of step S


1300


of

FIG. 5

;





FIG. 8

is a graph showing trajectories and trajectory envelopes, as well as the system constraints and task requirements that are defined by the trajectories and trajectory envelopes;





FIG. 9

is a flowchart outlining one exemplary embodiment of a method for predetermining trajectories and trajectory envelopes by explicitly representing the system constraints and task requirements;





FIG. 10

is a graph showing multiple trajectories and trajectory envelopes for an object;





FIG. 11

is a flowchart outlining one exemplary embodiment of a method for using multiple predetermined trajectories and trajectory envelopes for each object in system level control of a multi-level modular object handling system;





FIG. 12

is a flowchart outlining another exemplary embodiment of a method for using multiple predetermined trajectories and trajectory envelopes for each object in system level control of a multi-level modular object handling system;





FIG. 13

is a flowchart outlining in greater detail one exemplary embodiment of a method for selecting another predetermined trajectory for the selected object;





FIG. 14

is a graph showing the relationship of multiple trajectories and trajectory envelopes between multiple objects; and





FIG. 15

is a flowchart outlining one exemplary embodiment of a method for using predetermined trajectories and trajectory envelopes for each object in system level control of a multi-level modular object handling system which also takes collision avoidance among multiple objects into account.











DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS





FIG. 2

shows a modular object handling system


200


according to this invention that has a more control-centric design than the traditional media handling system


100


. This modular object handling system


200


includes a system controller


210


, one or more module controllers


220


, one or more module actuators


230


, and a path


240


. The system controller


210


communicates with the module controllers


220


via communication links


250


to coordinate the functions and/or operations of the individual module actuators


230


to provide a desired system function, such as transporting multiple objects along the path


240


via the module actuators


230


. The system controller


210


plans a trajectory of each object along the path


240


, by taking into account a variety of system constraints and task requirements. The module controllers


220


control their respective module actuators


230


via communication links


250


to maintain each object on its planned trajectory. This control strategy can be referred to as multi-layered hierarchical control architecture.




In order to plan a trajectory while taking a variety of system constraints and requirements into account, it is helpful for the system controller


210


to be aware of certain data relating to the module controllers


220


and the module actuators


230


. For example, the system controller


210


can be aware of entrance and exit points of each of the module actuators


230


, a maximum accelerating and retarding force that can be applied to an object by each module actuator


230


, and/or a response time of each module controller


220


.




The system controller


210


downloads the planned trajectories for each object to the local module controllers


220


via the communication links


250


. In one exemplary embodiment, the system controller


210


can download time-optimal trajectories to move objects at high speeds in the shortest possible time from one point to another point along the path


240


to enhance the productivity of the modular object handling system


200


.




In the trajectories for the path


240


, the object moves along the path


240


through regions where the object is subject to the control of several module actuators


230


, the time-optimal trajectories can be implemented by each module actuator


230


either applying maximum actuation or minimum actuation with discrete switching between the two. This can be proven by considering an arbitrary modular object handling system


200


that includes n module actuators


230


. Each module actuator


230


can apply a maximum acceleration a on the object using an array A=[a


1


, . . . ,a


n


], where


n


is the maximum acceleration of the nth module actuator


230


. The n module actuators


230


can also apply a maximum retardation r on the object using an array R=[r


1


, . . . ,r


n


], where r


n


is the maximum retardation of the nth module actuator


230


. The object enters the path


240


at some velocity v


0


and leaves the path


240


at some velocity v


n


.




Then, a desired trajectory, assuming that there are no other constraints, can be determined by first forward integrating the equations of motion of the object using the maximum accelerations for each module actuator, given the initial position and the initial velocity v


O


. Then, the equations of motion of the object are backward integrated using the maximum retardations for each module actuator given the desired final position and velocity v


n


. Next, the intersection points of the two trajectories, i.e., the switching times, are determined. In other words, the object moves forward under maximum acceleration from each module actuator


230


until the switching time, and then is retarded at maximum retardation by each module actuator


230


until that object reaches the final position and velocity.




As discussed above, the system controller


210


provides each module controller


220


with the trajectory for each object, which is usable by the module controller


220


to move the object once the object enters a region where the object is subject to control by the corresponding module actuator


230


. Communicating the distance-time trajectory via the communication links


250


to each module controller


220


can be done by supplying a sequence of points on the trajectory. However, such a representation requires significant communication bandwidth, especially if the trajectory information has to be downloaded to all the module controllers


230


via the communication links


250


, which may be several in number.




Since trajectories are communicated to several module controllers


220


via the communication links


250


in real time, it is desirable to provide a compact and efficient representation of the trajectories that do not overload the communication links


250


and that are computationally efficient. For example, the trajectories can be conceived as functions in a distance-time space. In fact, these functions can be represented as expansions of general basis functions. Basis functions can be computationally efficient, and once known, the trajectories can be reconstructed. An example of such basis functions can be polynomials, such as, for example, polynomial spline basis functions. Such a representation significantly reduces the amount of floating point numbers that the system controller


210


needs to send down to the local control modules


220


. Accordingly, high speed control is enabled without bogging down networks of the communication links


250


.




For example, the trajectories can be represented as cubic splines, wherein y(t) is position, v(t) is velocity and a(t) is acceleration of the object on the trajectory. The position, velocity and acceleration of the object on the trajectory can be represented as follows:








y


(


t


)=


a




o




+a




1


(


t−t




o


)+


a




2


(


t−t




o


)


2




+a




3


(


t−t




o


)


3


;










v


(


t


)=


a




1


+2


a




2


(


t−t




o


)+3


a




3


(


t−t




o


)


2


;






and








a


(


t


)=2


a




2


+6


a




3


(


t−t




o


).






Where:




a


o


, a


1


, a


2


and a


3


are constants;




t


0


≦t≦t


1


; and




t is a specified time.




Each of these splines can be represented as a curve on the cartesian plane from time t


0


to time t


1


, wherein either the position y, the velocity v, or the acceleration a is represented on one axis, and the time t is represented on the other axis. The shape of each of the curves is determined by the constants a


0


, a


1


, a


2


and a


3


.




Thus, once the constants a


o


, a


1


, a


2


and a


3


are known, any position y(t) can be evaluated along the curve defined by the above cubic spline. The spline v(t) representing the velocity of the object on the trajectory can then be provided by taking the derivative of the position y(t). Similarly, the spline a(t) representing the acceleration of the object on the trajectory can be provided by taking the derivative of the velocity v(t).




By selecting the initial time t


o


and the final time t


1


, each of the constants become:






a


0


=y


0


;








a


1


=v


0


;








a
2

=




3


(


y
1

-

y
0


)




t
1

-

t
0



-

2


v
0


-

v
1




t

1






-

t
0




;
and





a
3

=




v
0

+

v
1

+


2


(


y
0

-

y
1


)




t
1

-

t
0






(


t
1

-

t
0


)


2







.













Where:




y


0


and y


1


are the positions of the object on the trajectory at times t


o


and t


1


, respectively; and




v


o


and v


1


are the velocities of the object on the trajectory at times t


o


and t


1


, respectively.




The above representation of the constants a


2


and a


3


can be further simplified by representing the change in position between times t


1


and t


o


, i.e., y


1


−y


0


, as l, and the total lapsed time between times t


1


and t


0


, i.e., t


1


−t


0


, as d. The constants a


2


and a


3


thus become:








a
2

=



3


l
/
d


-

2


v
o


-

v
1


d


;
and





a
3

=




v
o

+

v
1

-

2


l
/
d




d
2


.











The modular object handling system


200


can include a number of the module actuators


230


. In this modular object handling system


200


, the time that the object enters the first module actuator


230


is t


1−1


or t


0


. The time that the object exits the last, i.e., n


th


, module actuator


230


, is t


n


. Thus, the duration of the object in the modular object handling system


200


is t


n


−t


o


. The time that an object enters the j


th


module actuator


230


is t


j


−t


j−1


, and the time that the object exits the j


th


module actuator


230


is t


j


. Thus, the time that the object is within the j


th


module actuator


230


is t


j


−t


j−1


.




For the interval t


j


−t


j−1


, which represents the time that the object is in the j


th


module actuator


230


, the constants a


o


, a


1


, a


2


and a


3


can be determined so that the above-described splines represent the overall system trajectory, i.e., the trajectory of the object within the entire modular object handling system


200


. However, if the overall system trajectory must be changed within the j


th


module actuator


230


, then new constants a


o


, a


1


, a


2


and a


3


must be determined. The new trajectory will begin at t


j−1


, and will be continuous and have continuous first derivatives with the old trajectory.




When the modular object handling system


200


is operating, multiple objects can move through the path along trajectories, which may be determined and represented as discussed above. Under these circumstances, one of the functions of the system controller


210


can be to apprehend situations where objects might collide and to avoid such collisions. The system controller


210


can detect collisions based on the relative position and velocities of the objects in the path


240


.




In one exemplary embodiment of a method for detecting and avoiding collisions according to this invention, the system controller


210


keeps track of the objects as the objects move. If the objects become too close to each other, and at the same time have non-zero relative velocities, the system controller


210


can redefine the trajectories of the objects to ensure that the objects do not collide. If the maximum acceleration that the objects can be moved at by the module actuators


230


is bounded, and the acceleration is a(t), then a(t) ε [−a


max,


a


max


]. The maximum relative acceleration is therefore:






a


coll-avoid


=2a


max


.






In accordance with this exemplary embodiment of the collision avoidance method, the system controller


210


continuously monitors the relative object spacing and relative object velocity for all objects and continuously updates the trajectory envelopes as outlined above. Whenever the system controller


210


determines that an object has moved too close to another object, the system controller


210


forces the local module controllers


220


to decrease the relative velocity of the appropriate objects by slowing down the trailing object. This is accomplished by changing the position-time reference trajectory via increasing the arrival time at the end of the appropriate module actuator


230


. Thus, the objects are always kept in a safe region of the modular object handling system


200


by the system controller


210


. If despite repeated corrections, the objects still tend to move too close together, the system controller


210


brings all the objects to a graceful halt by gradually slowing down all of the objects.




As discussed above, the modular object handling system


200


shown in

FIG. 2

tracks the objects using feedback control using the techniques outlined above. The local module controllers


220


accept the trajectories provided by the system controller


210


and control their respective module actuators


230


to keep the objects on the desired trajectories. The local module controllers


220


can also communicate with the system controller


210


and other local module controllers


220


, if necessary, to keep the objects on their appropriate trajectories.




The module actuators


230


can perform various tasks. Each task has a corresponding description in the appropriate space-time. The overall system trajectory planning is performed by keeping the constraints imposed by the task of each of the module actuators


230


. For example, the dwell time of an object that is stationary within a module actuator


230


corresponds to a horizontal line in the distance-time trajectory. When an object is simultaneously in two module actuators


230


, this situation can be described as a trajectory that has the same slope, i.e., velocity, in the distance region specified for both module actuators


230


. The trajectory therefore operates to effectively encode the constraints involved in moving the object on the path


240


.




The communication links


250


shown in

FIG. 2

are used to communicate the trajectory information back and forth between the module controllers


220


, the system controller


210


and/or any other intermediate controller (not shown) in the modular object handling system


200


. This bi-directional flow of information allows real-time corrections to be made to the trajectories. This ensures that conflicts between the multiple objects in the path


240


are resolved. For example, if two objects begin to get too close, that situation is sensed and the trajectories are replanned appropriately either by the module controllers


220


themselves or by the system controller


210


. The new trajectories are then communicated to the appropriate module actuators


230


. The module actuators


230


in turn, change their actuation to track the new trajectory.




The modular object handling system


200


discussed above provides numerous advantages over the traditional, single controller, object handling systems


100


. For example, using active feedback control to track trajectories allows different types of objects to be handled. The control techniques discussed above can have parameters that depend on the object properties, and can be adjusted in real time depending on the object types. This can be accomplished by inputting the object properties to the modular object handling system


200


. This can alternatively be accomplished by the modular object handling system


200


selecting the object properties during operation.




For high productivity, it is desirable to move objects at higher speeds. The modular object handling system


200


uses feedback control to keep the objects on the desired trajectories. Using active sensing and feedback control helps to correct the deviations from the desired trajectories in real time, and allows the object to be moved with high accuracy.




Since the object movement is monitored in real time, any situation arising in which a collision or other disruptive event may occur is detected by the modular object handling system


200


. The trajectories are replanned accordingly to avoid the collision or other disruptive event. If the situation cannot be corrected by simply replanning the trajectories, the modular object handling system


200


can be controlled to bring the objects moving along the path


240


to a graceful halt.




Finally, using more active feedback control to handle objects reduces the required accuracy of the module actuators


230


. It is possible to handle objects with less precisely manufactured module actuators


230


since the accuracy is maintained by sensing and control. Because the cost of the system and module controllers


210


and


220


is becoming cheaper, while the cost of the precision hardware is fairly constant, the overall cost of the modular object handling system


200


will decrease over time.




During operation of the modular object handling system


200


discussed above, the trajectory provided by the system controller


210


for each object takes a subset of the constraints and requirements into account. A nominal trajectory, which can be the time-optimal trajectory discussed above, is provided to represent the normal desired behavior for a single object. As such, the nominal trajectory encodes all such relevant control criteria. The relevant control criteria can include physical constraints, such as maximum object velocities when within each module actuator


230


, and task requirements, such as reaching a target position at a target time and at a target velocity.




The above-described modular object handling system


200


can be used to move any object. For example, the modular object handling system


200


can be a modular media handling system for use with sheets, such as a transport system in an analog or digital copier, printer or other image forming device. In such an exemplary embodiment of the modular object handling system


200


, tasks performed by module actuators


230


can include moving sheets, inverting sheets, decurling sheets, transferring images and fusing. The nominal trajectory therefore encodes the control criteria of these tasks.




In another exemplary application, the modular object handling system


200


can be a flight control system in an aircraft. In this example, the system controller


210


could be ground based, and the module controllers


220


and module actuators


230


could be onboard the aircraft. Using predetermined trajectories and trajectory envelopes may be particularly beneficial in view of recent changes in the airline industry towards implementing free flight, which allows pilots to choose their own trajectories for certain routes. Thus, the collision envelopes can be used to avoid collisions with other aircraft, and the control envelopes can be used to ensure that thc aircraft reaches its destination on time.




Using the modular object handling system


200


as a flight control system entails certain differences its use as a transport system in an image forming device. For example, in an image forming device, moving sheets are handled by stationary module actuators


230


. However, in a flight control system, the module actuators are onboard the object, i.e., the aircraft. Thus, the constraints of an aircraft, such as dynamics, maximum acceleration of the aircraft's engines, etc., travel with the aircraft, while the constraints of a sheet, such as the maximum acceleration of a certain module actuator


230


, depend on the location of the sheet within the image forming device.




In yet another exemplary application, the modular object handling system


200


can be an assembly line control system of a product assembly line, such as a newspaper printing press. In this example, the path


240


would be the assembly line, and the module actuators


230


would control regions along the assembly line. The nominal trajectories could be predetermined based on nominal performances of the module actuators


230


.





FIG. 3

is a graph of a typical time-distance nominal trajectory for the lead edge of a sheet when the modular object handling system


200


is a modular recording media handling system of an image forming device and the objects are sheets of recording media. As discussed above, cubic splines constitute only one possible manner of representing the time-distance trajectories.




When the modular media handling system


200


is operating, the system controller


210


communicates relevant pieces of this nominal trajectory as reference trajectories to the module controllers


220


. The system controller


210


delegates local control to the module controllers


220


. For example, if the trajectory contains entry and exit times and velocities of each module actuator


230


, then only these times and velocities have to be communicated to the corresponding module controllers


220


. The module controllers


220


can then reconstruct the necessary information for the behaviors of the sheets between each sheet's entry and exit from the respective module actuators


230


.




As discussed above, deviations from the nominal trajectory typically occur during the operation of the modular media handling system


200


. For minor deviations from the nominal trajectory, all control can be left to the module controllers


220


. The module controllers


220


do not need to be concerned with the behaviors of other module controllers


220


and other module actuators


230


, and those sheets outside of the module actuators


230


that are under the control of such other module controllers


220


and module actuators


230


. The module controllers


220


also do not need to be concerned with whether the overall control criteria are satisfied, such as whether the target time will be met, or whether sheets are about to collide.




In contrast, the system controller


210


is concerned with the behaviors of the module actuators


230


and whether the overall control criteria are satisfied. When the behaviors of one or more module actuators


230


deviate from the expected behaviors, the system controller


210


determines what is happening, the potential effects, and how to correct or compensate for these deviations. In particular, deviation from the nominal trajectory may violate the constraints and requirements described above, which could lead to sheet collision, missing the target, or violating one or more optimality criteria. Thus, if a sheet is delayed within a module actuator


230


, the system controller


210


has to determine whether subsequent sheets might collide, inform the relevant module controllers


220


involved, and possibly even generate new trajectories.




One primary duty of the system controller


210


is to determine which control criteria are violated. The system controller


210


can determine the status of various control criteria. For example, the system controller


210


could determine whether the objects are on track. This can be determined by checking whether the behavior of the module actuator


230


is sufficiently close to the nominal trajectory. If so, no further monitoring is required.




Determining the status of the control criteria, as well as identifying and reacting to the determined states, may require complex determinations, such as the various techniques discussed above, and can involve constraints from multiple module actuators


230


and sheets. Some problems, such as determining whether the target can still be reached, could even require replanning the entire trajectory from the current position, which may be difficult to accomplish in real time. Thus, since the control routines are continuously being performed, in order to respond in real time, the system controller


210


may have to resort to approximate determination and heuristics to identify the effects of deviations and to replan trajectories.




It may therefore be desirable to provide system-level control and monitoring systems and methods that replace these expensive and complex methods with simpler systems and methods for retrieving, combining and comparing trajectories and trajectory envelopes.




This can be accomplished by using predetermined trajectories and trajectory envelopes encoding various combinations of the system constraints and task requirements. Trajectory envelopes denote regions around other trajectories that indicate control criteria of interest. For example, instead of continuously checking the distance between objects to monitor the objects to avoid collisions, a predetermined collision envelope around the nominal trajectory can be used. Thus, as long as each object is within that object's collision envelope, the objects will not collide. The collision envelope can be determined in a similar manner as the safety region discussed above. However, instead of being continuously determined, the collision envelope can be determined prior to operation of the system.




In another exemplary embodiment, if an object deviates from its nominal trajectory, rather than replanning the trajectory for all module actuators


230


to determine whether the target can still be met, the modular object handling system


200


uses a control envelope. Thus, as long as an object remains within that object's control envelope, the object will still be able to reach the target. A trajectory envelope can be represented by one or more trajectories, which would, for example, denote the borders of the region of interest.




Thus, predetermined trajectory envelopes can be used to encode the control criteria of interest, together with multiple predetermined trajectories that denote control and collision boundaries. Different trajectory envelopes represent different control criteria. By comparing the current state (position, velocity, etc.) of an object with those predetermined trajectory envelopes, the system controller


210


is able to quickly determine the extent to which the state satisfies the criteria. The comparison operator depends on what the trajectory envelope encodes. For example, with a time-distance trajectory envelope, provided in a format similar to the nominal trajectory shown in

FIG. 3

, the system controller


210


only needs to test whether an object's position at the current time is to the left or right of the envelope boundary. Because those of ordinary skill in the art will be able to readily appreciate how to compare the current position of an object to the predetermined trajectory envelopes for different space-times, from the above description of a distance-time space, a detailed description of such comparisons is omitted.




The trajectories and trajectory envelopes can be determined using any appropriate known or later devised method. For example, the trajectories and trajectory envelopes can be arrived at in accordance with the determinations used to determine appropriate control and collision safety regions, such as, for example, optimal control and collision safety regions.




Regardless of how the trajectories and the trajectory envelopes are determined, predetermining the trajectories and the trajectory envelopes simplifies the control routines to merely include a comparison between the trajectories and the trajectory envelopes. This allows the system controller


210


to avoid having to determine the trajectories and the trajectory envelopes in real time during operation of the modular object handling system


210


.





FIG. 4

is a graph showing the trajectories and the trajectory envelopes for sample system and task constraints. For example, a nominal trajectory


400


is shown as approximately bisecting the distance-time plane.

FIG. 4

also shows a collision envelope


500


defined by an early collision trajectory


510


, to the left of, i.e., prior in time to, the nominal trajectory


400


, and a late collision trajectory


520


, to the right of, i.e., after in time to, the nominal trajectory


400


. The early collision trajectory


510


defines the earliest time that an object can depart from a certain point on the path


240


at a certain velocity and not collide with another object, such as the object immediately ahead of that object on the path


240


. The late collision trajectory


520


constitutes the latest time that an object can depart from a certain point on the path


240


at a certain velocity and not collide with another object, such as the object immediately behind that object on the path. This early-late collision envelope


500


can thus be used to encode a certain minimum distance between a certain object and the objects preceding and succeeding that object. As long as the object stays within that object's collision envelope


500


, and the preceding and succeeding objects do not deviate more than a minimum distance from their nominal trajectories, then the objects will not collide.





FIG. 4

also shows a control envelope


600


defined by an early control trajectory


610


, to the left of, i.e., prior in time to, the nominal trajectory


400


, and a late control trajectory


620


, to the right of, i.e., after in time to, the nominal trajectory


400


. The early control trajectory


610


constitutes the earliest time that an object can depart from a certain point on the path


240


at a certain velocity and still accomplish its task. The late control trajectory


620


constitutes the latest time that an object can depart from a certain point on the path


240


at a certain velocity and still accomplish its task. The early-late control envelope


600


can thus be used to encode a certain location at which the object must be located. As long as the object stays within that object's control envelope, then the object will be able to accomplish its task.




The above-described late control trajectory


620


constitutes the latest time that an object can depart from a certain point at a certain velocity and still accomplish its task, for an object that enters the first module actuator


230


at the same time that the object is scheduled to enter the first module actuator


230


according to the nominal trajectory


400


. In other words, the late control trajectory


620


enters the first module actuator


230


at the same time as the nominal trajectory


400


. However,

FIG. 4

also shows a latest control trajectory


630


that constitutes that latest time that an object can enter the first module actuator


230


and still accomplish its task. Thus, the latest control trajectory


630


enters the first module actuator


230


after the nominal trajectory


400


enters the first module actuator


230


.




Each of the trajectories


400


,


510


,


520


,


610


,


620


,


630


and the trajectory envelopes


500


,


600


can be represented as a sequence of tuples. For example, in a modular object handling system


200


, where the n


th


module actuator


230


is the last module actuator


230


, and the j


th


module actuator


230


is one of the module actuators


230


between the first and n


th


module actuators


230


, the sequence of tuples can be represented as t


o


,v


o


−t


1


,v


1


. . . ,t


j−1


,v


j−1


−t


j


,v


j


. . . , t


n−1


,v


n−1


−t


n


,v


n


. In these tuples, t


o


and v


o


represent the time and velocity of an object entering the first module actuator


230


, t


1


and v


1


represent the time and velocity of an object exiting the first module actuator


230


, t


j−1


and v


j−1


represent the time and velocity of an object entering the j


th


module actuator


230


, and t


j


and v


j


represent the time and velocity of an object exiting the j


th


module actuator


230


. Similarly, t


n−1


and v


n−1


, and t


n


and v


n


, represent the entry and exit times and velocities of an object relative to the n


th


, or last, module actuator


230


.




In operation, each object is provided with an appropriate main nominal trajectory as its reference trajectory. The responsibility to maintain each object within that object's main nominal trajectory is distributed among the module controllers


220


. That is, the module controllers


220


attempt to keep each object on its particular main nominal trajectory. The system controller


210


is then called repeatedly to assess the current state for all objects in a sequence and take action as necessary. In particular, the system controller


210


monitors object distances in the particular space-time, identifies collisions, delays objects to avoid collisions when feasible, and aborts the object's travel along the path


240


if the target can no longer be achieved. The significant real-time determinations are the comparisons of object positions with trajectories and other positions. This simple collision avoidance mechanism uses one trajectory envelope to identify possible collisions and other envelopes to check whether an object is still controllable. The system controller


210


can then instruct a module controller


220


locally to delay or advance a particular object by a certain amount.




The control systems and methods of this invention work particularly well if deviations are minor or uniform. In such a situation, all objects can be delayed in the same modules.





FIG. 5

is a flowchart outlining one exemplary embodiment of a method for using predetermined trajectories and trajectory envelopes in system level control of a multi-level modular object handling system. In this embodiment, the collision envelope is smaller than the control envelope, as shown in FIG.


4


.




Beginning in step S


1000


, control continues to step S


1100


, where an object is selected for analysis. Once the object is selected, control continues to step S


1200


, where a determination is made whether the object is within its predetermined collision envelope, i.e., whether the object is likely to collide with either preceding or succeeding objects. If the object is within its predetermined collision envelope, control returns to step S


1100


where another object is selected for analysis. A determination does not need to be made as to whether the object is within its control envelope, since as discussed above, the collision envelope is smaller than the control envelope. Thus, if the object is within its collision envelope, then it must also be within its control envelope. Alternatively, if the object is not within its collision envelope, control continues to step S


1300


.




In step S


1300


, a determination is made whether the object is within its control envelope, i.e., whether the object is likely to be able to accomplish its assigned task. If the object is within its control envelope, then control continues to step S


1400


. Otherwise, control jumps to step S


1500


. Instep S


1400


, the object is recorded as potentially colliding. The potentially colliding record can then be used to make a subsequent selection of an appropriate predetermined collision envelope for other objects. Only then would it be necessary to compute the actual distance between the potentially colliding objects and to take action as indicated above, e.g., to delay one of the objects.




The object is potentially colliding since the object was determined in step S


1200


as being outside of its collision envelope. However, since the object is determined in step S


1300


as being within its control envelope, control then returns from step S


1400


to step S


1100


where another object is selected for analysis.




Alternatively, in step S


1500


, a determination is made whether the nominal trajectory, collision envelope and/or control envelope should be replanned. If so, control continues to step S


1600


. Otherwise, control jumps to step S


1700


. In step S


1600


, one or more of the nominal trajectory, collision envelope and/or control envelopes are replanned. This can also result in a modification of the system task requirements. Control then returns to step S


1100


, where another object is selected for analysis.




Alternatively, if it is determined that the nominal trajectory, collision envelope and/or control envelope should not be replanned, then control continues to step S


1700


where the analysis is terminated.





FIG. 6

is a flowchart outlining in greater detail one exemplary embodiment of a method for determining if the object is within its collision envelope of step S


1200


of FIG.


5


. Beginning in step S


1200


, control continues to step S


1210


, where a predetermined nominal trajectory for the object is referenced. Then, in step S


1220


, a predetermined collision envelope is referenced for the referenced predetermined nominal trajectory. Next, in step S


1230


, the actual current status, such as velocity, acceleration and/or position, of the object is referenced. Control continues to step S


1240


.




In step S


1240


, a determination is made whether the referenced actual current status of the object is within the referenced collision envelope for that time. If so, control returns to step S


1100


of FIG.


5


. If not, control returns to step S


1300


of FIG.


5


.





FIG. 7

is a flowchart outlining in greater detail one exemplary embodiment of a method for determining if the object is within its control envelope of step S


1300


of FIG.


5


. Beginning in step S


1300


, control continues to step S


1310


, where a predetermined nominal trajectory of the object is referenced. This referenced predetermined nominal trajectory can be the same nominal trajectory of step S


1200


. Next, in step S


1320


, a predetermined control envelope is referenced for the referenced predetermined nominal trajectory. Then, in step S


1330


, the actual current status, such as velocity, acceleration and/or position, of the object is referenced. This actual current status of the object can be the same object status of step S


1200


. Control then continues to step S


1340


.




In step S


1340


, a determination is made whether the referenced actual current status of the object is within the referenced control envelope for that time. If so, control returns to step S


1400


of FIG.


5


. If not, control returns to step S


1500


of FIG.


5


.




In accordance with another exemplary embodiment of the methods for using predetermined trajectories and trajectory envelopes of this invention, the control envelope could be smaller than the collision envelope. A flowchart illustrating this alternative exemplary embodiment would be similar to the flowchart of

FIG. 5

, except that steps S


1200


and S


1300


would be juxtaposed. Thus, a first determination would be made whether the object is within its control envelope. If not, then a second determination would then be made whether the object is within its collision envelope.




In other exemplary embodiments of the apparatus and methods for using predetermined trajectories and trajectory envelopes of this invention, the trajectories and trajectory envelopes are predetermined by explicitly representing the system constraints and task requirements. The trajectories and trajectory envelopes can be predetermined by manually performing determinations, such as by manually encoding cubic splines to explicitly represent the system constraints and task requirements.




Manually determining the cubic splines can also entail treating the system constraints differently from the task requirements. For example, the system constraints can be manually treated as hard constraints for all possible trajectories and trajectory envelopes. That is, all trajectories and trajectory envelopes are manually predetermined to satisfy the system constraints. In contrast, at least some of the task requirements can be manually treated as merely constituting soft limits that apply only to the normal trajectory. That is, these task requirements can be violated by certain trajectories and trajectory envelopes.




Manually determining the cubic splines can be performed when creating a new modular object handling system


200


. Manually determining the cubic splines can also be performed when modifying an existing modular object handling system


200


by changing the constraints or the arrangement of the module actuators


230


.




However, manually determining the cubic splines can be tedious and time consuming. Thus, in still other exemplary embodiments of the apparatus and method for using predetermined trajectories and trajectory envelopes of this invention, the trajectories and trajectory envelopes are automatically predetermined. In fact, explicitly representing the system constraints and task requirements lends itself to automatically predetermining the trajectories and trajectory envelopes. For example, because the system constraints and task requirements are explicitly represented, the trajectories and trajectory envelopes can be automatically predetermined upon adding new constraints created when the control criteria are changed.




The explicitly represented system constraints and task requirements enable each of the module actuators


230


to be described independently. Describing each of the module actuators


230


independently in terms of the system constraints and/or task requirements allows the trajectories and trajectory envelopes to be automatically predetermined once the arrangement of module actuators


230


is specified. Thus, the trajectories and trajectory envelopes can be automatically predetermined for various system configurations. This tendency toward automatic predetermination of trajectories and trajectory envelopes is especially apparent to one of ordinary skill in the art based upon the following description of the separately explicitly represented system constraints and task requirements for each module actuator


230


.




Generally, the system constraints and task requirements can be described in terms of physical constraints, task constraints, user preferences, optimality and robustness. Examples of physical constraints include maximum module actuator


230


actuation forces, maximum object velocities, maximum velocity differentials between the module actuators


230


, and minimum object distances. Examples of task constraints include target object positions and times, and maximum and average object velocities. Examples of user preferences include specific transport strategies and object orders. An example of optimality includes overall throughput. An example of robustness includes buffer regions for average object behavior variability.




More specifically, the system constraints include the combined constraints of all of the module actuators


230


. Each module actuator


230


is subject to a specific set of module constraints. For example, each module actuator


230


has maximum and minimum velocity limits and maximum and minimum acceleration limits. Thus, the velocities and accelerations in a trajectory are limited by the minimum and maximum velocities and accelerations of each of the module actuators


230


.




Controlling multiple module actuators


230


together also creates module constraints. Specifically, the velocities of objects moving along trajectories within different module actuators


230


that are controlled together must be equal. If not, then other controls will not be able to be applied in unison to the objects within the different module actuators


230


.




As another example, placing two module actuators


230


adjacent to each other creates module constraints. Specifically, the difference in velocities between the two adjacent module actuators


230


is limited. If not, objects may be damaged as the objects are transferred from one module actuator


230


to the adjacent module actuator


230


.




The task requirements can also be specifically described in terms of the individual module actuators


230


, such as the target criteria of a certain module actuator


230


. For example, accomplishing a certain task may require that an object exit a certain module actuator


230


at a specified velocity. Target criteria can also include a requirement that the arrivals of the objects be separated by a specified time period p when arriving at a certain module actuator


230


.




Task requirements can also take into account collision avoidance at certain module actuators


230


. For example, certain tasks may require that a minimum gap g between objects be maintained at a certain module actuator


230


to avoid collisions.




Task requirements can also require taking into account velocity and acceleration limits at certain module actuators


230


. For example, average travel velocities and maximum accelerations may be imposed on the nominal trajectory to accomplish a certain task at a certain module actuator


230


. Violating the average travel velocity or maximum acceleration may make it impossible to accomplish a certain task of that module actuator


230


.




The system constraints and task requirements can also be depicted graphically. For example,

FIG. 8

is a graph showing trajectories and trajectory envelopes, as well as the system constraints and task requirements that are defined by the trajectories and trajectory envelopes. The x-axis of

FIG. 8

represents time, and the y-axis represents the various module controllers


230


of the modular object handling system


200


. The modular object handling system


200


represented by

FIG. 8

includes 7 module actuators


230


.




As will be evident from the following description, the trajectory envelopes of

FIG. 8

are defined differently than the trajectory envelopes shown in FIG.


4


. For example, in

FIG. 4

, the trajectory envelopes


500


and


600


are defined between boundary trajectories


510


and


520


, and


610


and


620


that are disposed on opposing sides of the nominal trajectory


400


. In contrast, in

FIG. 8

, the trajectory envelopes are defined between the nominal trajectory and a boundary trajectory.





FIG. 8

shows a nominal trajectory


2000


of a leading edge of an object as well as a trajectory


2100


of a trailing edge of the object. The length of the object is shown by connecting the trajectories


2000


and


2100


, i.e., the lead and trail edges of the object, with a vertical line. Accordingly, the graph of

FIG. 8

shows that at the earliest indicated time, the nominal trajectory


2000


of the lead edge of the object exits the module


2


while the trajectory


2100


of the trail edge enters the module


2


. Similarly, at the latest indicated time, the nominal trajectory


2000


of the lead edge of the object exits the module 7 while the trajectory


2100


of the trail edge enters the module 7.





FIG. 8

shows a robust control envelope


2200


that is defined between the nominal trajectory


2000


and a late robust control trajectory


2210


. The late robust control trajectory


2210


represents the latest time that an object can depart from a certain point on the path


240


at a certain velocity and still accomplish its task under a specified failure model, such as, for example, upon the failure of an operation of a certain module actuator


230


along the path


240


. Thus, the robust control envelope


2200


can be used to encode a certain location at which the object must be located to be able to accomplish its task under a specified failure model.





FIG. 8

also shows a control envelope


2300


that is defined between the nominal trajectory


2000


and a late control trajectory


2310


. The late control trajectory


2310


represents the latest time that an object can depart from a certain point on the path


240


at a certain velocity and still accomplish its task. Thus, the control envelope


2300


can be used to encode a certain location at which the object must be located to be able to accomplish its task.




The control envelope


2300


is different from the robust control envelope


2200


since it does not take into account a specified failure module. Thus, the late control trajectory


2310


is able to enter and exit each module at a later time than the late robust control trajectory


2210


and still accomplish its task.




However, the control envelope


2300


and robust control envelope


2200


are otherwise similar. For example, the late robust control trajectory


2210


and the late control trajectory


2310


each do not enter the first module until after the earliest time shown in FIG.


8


. The late robust control trajectory


2210


and the late control trajectory


2310


each exit module


7


at the same time as the nominal trajectory


2000


. Thus, the nominal trajectory


2000


, late robust control trajectory


2210


and late control trajectory


2310


all have the same target, but have different entry times.




Certain system constraints and task requirements can be graphically represented based upon the nominal trajectory


2000


, the late robust control trajectory


2210


and the late control trajectory


2310


. For example, robustness can be depicted as a horizontal line extending between the nominal trajectory


2000


and the late robust control trajectory


2210


. Controllability can be depicted as a horizontal line extending between the late robust control trajectory


2210


and the late control trajectory


2310


.





FIG. 8

additionally shows a nominal trajectory


2400


for a second object and a collision envelope


2500


for that second object. The collision envelope


2500


is defined between the nominal trajectory


2400


and an early collision trajectory


2510


for the second object. For example, the collision envelope


2500


for a certain time can be represented as a vertical line extending between the nominal trajectory


2400


and the early collision trajectory


2510


of the second object at that time. The early collision trajectory


2510


constitutes the earliest time that the second object can depart from a certain point on the path


240


at a certain velocity and not collide with the first object having the nominal trajectory


2000


. Thus, the collision envelope


2500


can be used to encode a certain location at which the second object must be located so as not to collide with the first object.




Other system constraints and task requirements can be graphically represented by including the nominal trajectory


2400


and the early collision trajectory


2510


of the second object. For example, repetition can be depicted as a horizontal line extending between the nominal trajectory


2000


of the first object and the nominal trajectory


2400


of the second object. Interaction can be depicted as a vertical line extending between the nominal trajectory


2400


of the second object and the trajectory of the trailing edge


2100


of the first object.




Based on the graph of

FIG. 8

, one of ordinary skill in the art will find it evident that other trajectories and trajectory envelopes can be determined by building on other trajectories. For example, all other trajectories and trajectory envelopes can be determined by using constraints that are based on the nominal trajectory.





FIG. 8

shows that the end time of the nominal trajectory


2000


is used as an end time constraint for other trajectories and trajectory envelopes. In other words, other trajectories and trajectory envelopes shown in

FIG. 8

are determined so those other trajectories and trajectory envelopes end at the same time as the nominal trajectory.




For example,

FIG. 8

shows that the late robust control trajectory


2210


and the late control trajectory


2310


are determined to end at the same time and location as the nominal trajectory


2000


of the one object. The robust control envelope


2200


and the control envelope


2300


, which are defined by the late robust control trajectory


2210


and the late control trajectory


2310


, respectively, are also therefore determined to end at the same time and location as the nominal trajectory


2000


of the one object.




The collision envelopes can similarly be determined by using constraints that are based on the nominal trajectory. For example,

FIG. 8

shows that start and end times of the nominal trajectories of the objects are used as start and end time constraints of the collision envelope


2500


and the early collision trajectory


2510


of the other object.




Specifically,

FIG. 8

shows that the early collision trajectory


2510


is determined to begin at the same time and location as the nominal trajectory


2400


of the other object. The early collision trajectory is also determined to end at the same time and location as the trajectory


2100


of the trailing edge of the first object. The collision envelope


2500


of the second object, which is defined between the early collision trajectory


2510


and the nominal trajectory


2400


of the second object, is also determined by these constraints.





FIG. 9

is a flowchart outlining one exemplary embodiment of a method for predetermining trajectories and trajectory envelopes by explicitly representing the system constraints and task requirements. In this exemplary embodiment, the trajectories and trajectory envelopes can be automatically predetermined.




Beginning in step S


3000


, control continues to step S


3100


, where the system model is specified. Specifying the system model can entail at least specifying the number of individual module actuators, the types of the specified module actuators, and the configuration of the specified module actuators. For example, the system model can be specified as 3 modules, of type 1, configured in a serial formation. The type designation “type 1” merely constitutes an arbitrary designation of a type of the module actuators. As discussed below each type of module has a distinctive set of module constraints and task requirements.




Once the system model is specified, control continues to step S


3200


, where the system constraints and task requirements are specified. As discussed above, the system constraints are made up of the combined constraints of all of the module actuators. Further, each type of module actuator, such as the exemplary type 1 module actuator, is subject to a distinctive set of constraints, such as maximum and minimum velocity and maximum and minimum acceleration limits, as well as constraints created by controlling multiple module actuators together and disposing the specified module actuators adjacent to each other.




Also, as discussed above, the task requirements can additionally be described in terms of the individual module actuators. For example, accomplishing a certain task may subject a module actuator, such as the exemplary type 1 module actuator, to a variety of constraints, such as, for example, target criteria, collision avoidance and velocity and acceleration limits.




Examples of the system constraints and task requirements for the exemplary type 1 module actuator include, for example, that each type 1 module actuator can have such module constraints as a length of 25.4 mm, a minimum velocity v


min


of an object traveling through that module actuator of −3.0 mm/ms, a maximum velocity v


max


of an object traveling through that module actuator of 3.0 mm/ms; a minimum acceleration a


min


of an object traveling through that module actuator of −0.02 mm/ms


2


; and a maximum acceleration a


max


of an object traveling through that module actuator


230


of 0.02 mm/ms


2


.




Each type of the module actuators can also have a variety of general task constraints that may need to be satisfied for that type of module actuator to accomplish its designated task. For example, in accordance with general task constraints of the type 1 module actuator, an object may need to have an initial velocity v


o


of 0.0 mm/ms, and an ending velocity v


n


of 0.5 mm/ms. The type 1 module actuator may also need to operate such that the object always travels at a velocity v within the module actuator that is ≧0.0 mm/ms.




Similarly, each type 1 module actuator can have nominal task constraints that may need to be satisfied to meet other criteria, such as to enable the module actuator to operate at increased efficiency. For example, the nominal task constraints can include the general task constraints, and additionally a constraint that the module actuator operates such that the velocity v of the object within the module actuator is always ≦1.0 mm/ms. Satisfying this constraint may thereby enable the module actuator to operate more quickly and reliably.




The system constraints and task requirements of the type 1 module actuators may also require that objects within the type 1 module actuators be separated by certain constraints to satisfy task requirements and/or prevent collisions with other objects. For example, the objects may need to be separated for by a period “s” of 500 ms, and by a minimum gap “g” of 30 mm.




Once the system constraints and task requirements are specified, control continues to step S


3300


, where a nominal trajectory T


r


of an object is predetermined. The nominal trajectory T


r


can be predetermined via a constraint solver, such as a generic constraint solver or an optimizing constraint solver, that solves the system and task constraints, such as the constraints discussed above, while minimizing associated trajectory criteria. For example, the nominal trajectory T


r


can be predetermined via the constraint t


o


=0, and minimizing the constraints t


n


−t


o


, wherein t


o


is the time that the object enters the first module actuator


230


and t


n


is the time that the object exits the last module actuator


230


on the path


240


.




In predetermining the nominal trajectory T


r


, the constraints are translated to constraints on the desired trajectory, such as, for example, to constraints on the cubic splines defined by the trajectory. Constraints on entry and exit times and velocities are directly added to the cubic splines. Minimum and maximum constraints on the velocities and accelerations of entire modules can be translated to constraints on the minima and maxima of the velocity and acceleration functions defined by the cubic splines.




The set of particular task constraints depends on the trajectory's purpose. Thus, the nominal trajectory T


r


may satisfy all task constraints since it constitutes the desired trajectory.




After the nominal trajectory T


r


is predetermined, control continues to step S


3400


, where the nominal trajectory T


p


of the previous object on the path is predetermined. The previous nominal trajectory T


p


is predetermined by shifting the nominal trajectory T


r


by −s, which, as discussed above, is the period with which objects are expected to arrive at the target position.




After the previous nominal trajectory T


p


is predetermined, control continues to step S


3500


, where the nominal trajectory T


n


of the next object on the path is predetermined. The next nominal trajectory T


n


is predetermined by shifting the nominal trajectory T


r


by +s.




After the next nominal trajectory T


n


is predetermined, control continues to S


3600


, where the collision envelope is predetermined. The collision envelope is predetermined by predetermining the early and late collision borders.




The early collision border T


e


is predetermined by solving the constraints, such as, for example, the system and general task constraints, as well as the collision constraints, such as, for example, the period “s” and the gap “g”, with the previous nominal trajectory T


p


and the next nominal trajectory T


n


. Since the set of particular task constraints depends on the trajectory's purpose, the early and late collision borders may not need to satisfy the suggested velocity and acceleration limits. The early collision border T


e


can also be predetermined via the constraints t


o


=0, and t


n


=t


n


in the nominal trajectory T


r


, minimizing t


n−1


.




The late collision border T


1


is predetermined by solving the constraints, such as, for example, the system and general task constraints, as well as the collision constraints, such as, for example, the period “s” and the gap “g”, with the previous nominal trajectory T


p


and the next nominal trajectory T


n


. The late collision border T


1


can also be predetermined via the constraints t


o


=0, and t


n


=t


n


in the nominal trajectory Tr, minimizing t


n


−t


1


, where t


1


is a time between t


o


and t


n


.




After the collision envelope is predetermined, control continues to S


3700


, where the control envelope is predetermined. The control envelope can be defined between an early control border


610


and a late control border


620


, as shown in FIG.


4


. Alternatively, the control envelope can be defined between the nominal trajectory


2000


and one of the late robust control trajectory


2210


and the late control trajectory


2310


, as shown in FIG.


8


.




In the case shown in

FIG. 8

, the late robust control trajectory


2210


, which is also referred to herein as T


c


, is predetermined by solving the constraints, such as, for example, the system and general task constraints. Since the set of particular task constraints depends on the trajectory's purpose, the control border T


c


may only satisfy the target constraints. The late robust control trajectory T


c


can also be predetermined via the constraint t


n


=t


n


in the nominal trajectory T


r


, minimizing t


n


−t


o


.




After the control envelope has been predetermined, control ends at step S


3800


.




The systems and methods discussed above predetermine a trajectory, such as a nominal trajectory, as well as at least one predetermined trajectory envelope that is associated with the predetermined trajectory, such as a control envelope, for each object that moves along the path


240


. These systems and methods are particularly effective if the trajectory envelope, such as the control envelope, is narrow. A control envelope will be narrow if a difference between an early control trajectory and a late control trajectory is small. These systems and methods are also particularly effective if deviations from the predetermined trajectory, such as the nominal trajectory, are small and/or substantially uniform for multiple objects moving along the path


240


.




However, if a predetermined trajectory envelope, such as the control envelope, is large and/or an object deviates a large amount from the predetermined trajectory, such as the nominal trajectory, then the module actuators


230


may exert a large amount of energy in attempting to place the object back on that object's predetermined nominal trajectory. Further, the module actuators


230


may exert this large amount of energy even though an alternative trajectory may exist that would still enable the object to reach the object's target but that would enable the module actuators


230


to use less energy.




For example, such an alternative trajectory may entail delaying an object to prevent a module actuator


230


from using an unnecessarily large amount of energy in attempting to reach that object's predetermined nominal trajectory. Accordingly, in various other exemplary embodiments of the systems and methods of this invention, multiple trajectories, such as nominal trajectories, are predetermined and used for each object. Separate trajectory envelopes are also predetermined and used for each of the multiple predetermined trajectories. Thus, it is possible in these exemplary embodiments of apparatus and methods of this invention to switch, for each object, between multiple predetermined trajectories to actively improve energy usage. It is also possible, in these exemplary embodiments of the systems and methods, to modify the trajectories of other objects to avoid collisions with the object whose trajectory was originally switched.




For example, multiple nominal trajectories, as well as associated trajectory envelopes for each of the multiple nominal trajectories, can be predetermined for each object. Then, it is possible, in these exemplary embodiments of the systems and methods of this invention, to monitor the status of each object, and to select another nominal trajectory for one or each of multiple objects depending on the current circumstances of operation. The newly selected nominal trajectory, as well as the newly selected nominal trajectory's trajectory envelope, can then be communicated as a new reference trajectory and associated trajectory envelope to the module controllers


220


. The trajectories of the other objects moving along the path can then be switched as necessary to avoid collisions with the object moving along the newly selected trajectory.





FIG. 10

is a graph showing multiple trajectories and trajectory envelopes for an object. The trajectories


4000


,


4100


,


4200


,


4300


and


4400


can each represent, for example, a nominal trajectory. The trajectory regions


4015


,


4025


,


4035


,


4045


and


4055


can define envelopes, such as, for example, control envelopes, around each of the nominal trajectories


4000


,


4100


,


4200


,


4300


and


4400


.




Specifically, a control envelope


4015


can be defined by the control trajectory boundaries


4010


and


4020


around the nominal trajectory


4000


. Similarly, a control envelope


4025


can be defined by the control trajectory boundaries


4020


and


4030


around the nominal trajectory


4100


. A control envelope


4035


can be defined by the control trajectory boundaries


4030


and


4040


around the nominal trajectory


4200


. A control envelope


4045


can be defined by the control trajectory boundaries


4040


and


4050


around the nominal trajectory


4300


. Finally, a control envelope


4055


can be defined by the control trajectory boundaries


4050


and


4060


around the nominal trajectory


4400


.




These trajectories and trajectory envelopes can be predetermined by the system controller


210


. The system controller


210


can select a reference trajectory among these predetermined trajectories, and communicate the selected predetermined reference trajectory to the module controllers


220


. Then, depending on the circumstances, the system controller


210


can select another predetermined reference trajectory, and communicate this new reference trajectory to the module controllers


220


.





FIG. 11

is a flowchart outlining one exemplary embodiment of a method for using multiple predetermined trajectories and trajectory envelopes for each object in system level control of a multi-level modular object handling system. In this exemplary embodiment of the methods, collision among multiple objects is not taken into account.




Beginning in step S


5000


, control continues to step S


5100


, where an object is selected for analysis. Once the object is selected, control continues to step S


5200


, where a predetermined trajectory is selected for the selected object. The selected predetermined trajectory can be, for example, the nominal trajectory


4000


shown in FIG.


10


.




Once the predetermined trajectory is selected, in step S


5300


, a determination is made whether the selected object is within a predetermined trajectory envelope for the selected predetermined trajectory. The predetermined trajectory envelope can be, for example, the control envelope


4015


. As shown in

FIG. 10

, the control envelope


4015


is defined by the control trajectory boundaries


4010


and


4020


around the nominal trajectory


4000


.




In this example, the actual current status of the object could be referenced. The actual current status of the object would then be compared to the predetermined trajectory envelope for the selected predetermined trajectory, i.e., control envelope


4015


of FIG.


10


. Thus, the determination of step S


5300


can be performed similarly to steps S


1200


and S


1300


of

FIG. 5

, which are shown in greater detail in

FIGS. 6 and 7

, respectively.




If a determination is made in step S


5300


that the object is within the predetermined trajectory envelope for the selected predetermined trajectory, then control continues to step S


5500


, where a next smaller trajectory is selected. In step S


5600


, it is determined whether the selected next smaller trajectory is within the predetermined trajectory envelope. If so, then control returns to step S


5500


. If not, then step S


5700


returns to the previously selected trajectory. Control then returns to step S


5100


.




In contrast, if a determination is made in step S


5300


that the object is not within the predetermined trajectory envelope for the selected predetermined trajectory, then control continues to step S


5400


, where a next larger predetermined trajectory is selected for the selected object. For example, if the object is at a location between the control trajectory boundary


4020


and the nominal trajectory


4100


, then the object could be determined as not being within control envelope


4015


, as shown in FIG.


10


. In such a situation, the selected other predetermined trajectory could then be, for example, the nominal trajectory


4100


.




Once the next predetermined trajectory is selected in step S


5400


, control returns to step S


5300


, where the determination of step S


5300


is performed for the selected next predetermined trajectory.




It should be appreciated that, in step S


5400


, that the selected next larger trajectory can simply be the next larger trajectory in a predetermined order of the provided multiple trajectories. However, as shown in

FIG. 11

, this will require multiple passes through steps S


5300


and S


5400


until a predetermined trajectory is located that contains the current object. Similarly, it should be appreciated that, in steps S


5500


-S


5700


, that the next smaller trajectory can simply be the next smaller trajectory in a predetermined order of the provided multiple trajectories.




However, this may not be the most efficient method for determining which of the provided multiple trajectories to use. That is, it may be more efficient to directly determine, in steps S


5400


and S


5500


, which of the provided multiple trajectories, is the trajectory having the minimal control envelope that contains the current object. In this case, as shown in

FIG. 12

, steps S


5500


-S


5700


can be omitted, and control can jump directly from step S


5400


back to step S


5100


.





FIG. 13

is a flowchart outlining in greater detail one exemplary embodiment of a method for selecting a next predetermined trajectory for the selected object of step S


5400


of FIG.


12


. Beginning in step S


5400


, control continues to step S


5410


, where the actual current status of the selected object is determined. Then, in step S


5420


, all multiple predetermined trajectory envelopes of the selected object are referenced.




Next, in step S


5430


, the determined actual current status is compared to the referenced multiple predetermined trajectory envelopes of the selected object. Based on this comparison, the predetermined trajectory whose envelope contains the actual current status of the selected object is selected as the next predetermined trajectory for the selected object in step S


5440


.




For example, actual current status of the selected object could be at a location between the trajectory boundary


4020


and the nominal trajectory


4100


(with envelope


4025


). In such a situation, the predetermined nominal trajectory whose envelope contains the object's location would be nominal trajectory


4100


. Thus, the nominal trajectory


4100


would be selected in step S


5440


as the next predetermined trajectory.




In an alternative example, the actual current status of the selected object could be at a location in the trajectory space between the trajectory boundary


4050


and the nominal trajectory


4400


(with envelope


4055


). In such a situation, the predetermined nominal trajectory whose envelope contains the object's location in the trajectory space would be the nominal trajectory


4400


. Thus, the nominal trajectory


4400


would be selected in step S


5440


.




In the above exemplary embodiment, in step S


5440


, the next predetermined trajectory is selected solely on the basis of being closest to the actual current status of the selected object. However, in an alternative exemplary embodiment, other factors can additionally be used to select the predetermined trajectory. Specifically, proximity to the trajectory originally selected in step S


5200


can also be taken into account.




This alternative exemplary embodiment provides a more gradual change in trajectories. Thus, the alternative exemplary embodiment is less disruptive to the system level control than the exemplary embodiment discussed above.




For example, the predetermined nominal trajectory that is closest to the actual current status of the selected object, while also being adjacent to the previous nominal trajectory selected in step S


5200


, can be selected in step S


5440


. As discussed in the above example, the nominal trajectory


4000


can be the selected predetermined trajectory in step S


5200


. For example, the referenced actual current status of the selected object could be at a location in the trajectory space between the trajectory boundary


4050


and the nominal trajectory


4400


. In such a situation, the predetermined nominal trajectory that is closest to the actual current status of the selected object, while also being adjacent to the previous nominal trajectory selected in step S


5200


, would be the nominal trajectory


4100


.




In another exemplary embodiment, collision among multiple objects can be taken into account. Specifically, collisions can be avoided by comparing a current trajectory region of an object with the collision avoidance regions of the preceding and succeeding objects traveling along the path


240


. This comparison can be based on collision avoidance criteria, such as minimum distance between two sheets.




The relationship between the current trajectory envelope of a first object and the collision avoidance region of a second immediately succeeding object can be represented as n number of tuples i,j, wherein i represents the first objcct's trajectory envelope and j represents the second immediately succeeding object's trajectory envelope. (Here, the n envelopes of an object are labeled from


1


through n starting from the left). If the first object is disposed in trajectory envelope i, then the second immediately succeeding object has to be disposed in trajectory envelope k, wherein k≧j. Conversely, if the second object is disposed in trajectory envelope j, then a first immediately preceding object has to be disposed in trajectory envelope k, wherein k≦i. These tuples can be collectively referred to as a collision avoidance table.




The trajectory envelope that the first object is disposed in can be the first object's nominal trajectory which satisfies all constraints. Whenever that nominal trajectory is switched to another reference trajectory, the preceding and succeeding object's reference trajectories are checked, and new reference trajectories are chosen as necessary.




If i=j for all tuples i,j in the collision avoidance table, then the reference trajectories for all of the objects are changed together, i.e., all objects in a sequence will be sped up or delayed in sync. Alternatively, if i>j for all tuples (except if i=1 orj=n for n envelopes), then only a subset of the reference trajectories will need to be changed. The relationship between reference trajectories of a first object and collision avoidance regions of a second object are explained in further detail below with reference to FIG.


14


.





FIG. 14

is a graph showing the relationship of multiple trajectories and trajectory envelopes between multiple objects. Specifically, the trajectories and trajectory envelopes of a second object are shown as being shifted from the trajectories and trajectory envelopes of a first object by a distance s.




In

FIG. 14

, the solid lines of each object's graph represent different trajectories, and the dashed lines represent the trajectory envelopes surrounding each of these trajectories. The trajectory that is furthest to the left in each object's graph can be represented as


1


, and the other trajectories can be represented as


2


,


3


,


4


and


5


, respectively, from left to right.




Vertical lines connect trajectories among the objects to indicate collision avoidance regions, i.e., the tuples in the collision avoidance table. For example, the vertical line referenced as


1


-


1


connects trajectory


1


of the first object and trajectory


1


of the second object at the same time in time space. If the second object follows the trajectory indicated by vertical line


1


-


1


or a lower trajectory on the graph, then the second object will not collide with the first object following trajectory


1


.




Similarly, vertical line


2


-


1


connects trajectory


2


of the first object and trajectory


1


of the second object. If the second object follows the trajectory indicated by vertical line


2


-


1


or a lower trajectory shown on the graph, then the second object will not collide with the first object traveling along trajectory


2


.




Vertical lines


1


-


1


and


2


-


1


are discussed above in terms of determining a collision envelope of the second object based on the trajectory of the first object. However, the vertical lines can conversely be used to determine a collision envelope of the first object based on the trajectory of the second object. For example, if the first object follows a trajectory connected to a vertical line or a higher trajectory, then the first object will not collide with the second object following a trajectory connected to that vertical line.





FIG. 15

is a flowchart outlining one exemplary embodiment of a method for using predetermined trajectories and trajectory envelopes for each object in system level control of a multi-level modular object handling system which also takes collision avoidance among multiple objects into account. It should be appreciated that steps S


6000


-S


6400


of

FIG. 15

are the same as steps S


5000


-S


5400


of FIG.


12


.




Then, following the selection of a next predetermined trajectory for the selected object in step S


6400


, control continues to step S


6500


, where the minimum allowed distances separating the selected object from the adjacent preceding and succeeding objects is referenced. The minimum allowed distances can be determined via a collision avoidance table based on data similar to the data represented in FIG.


14


.




After the minimum allowed distances are referenced, control continues to step S


6600


, where a determination is made whether the selected other predetermined trajectory for the selected object violates, i.e., is less than, either of the referenced minimum allowed distances separating the selected object from the adjacent preceding and succeeding objects. If the minimum allowed distances are not violated, then control returns to step S


6100


, where another object is selected for analysis.




In contrast, if the selected other predetermined trajectory for the selected object violates either of the referenced minimum allowed distances separating the selected object from the adjacent preceding and succeeding objects, control continues to step S


6700


, where the trajectory of the adjacent preceding or succeeding object is modified to satisfy the minimum allowed distance. This modification can be accomplished by switching the trajectory of the affected object to the closest trajectory for that object relative to that object's current trajectory that is greater than the minimum allowed distance. Switching the trajectory to the closest acceptable trajectory increases the efficiency of the object handling method.




After the trajectory of the adjacent preceding or succeeding object is modified, control returns to step S


6100


, where another object is selected for analysis.




The multilevel modular object handling systems discussed above can detect the actual current position of each object in accordance with any conceivable method or apparatus. For example, the actual position may be obtained via any type of detecting sensor. The actual position may also be estimated by a determination observer, such as a Luenberger observer, or alternatively a stochastic observer, such as a Kalman filter. The actual position may also be determined via a combination of actual sensing and estimation.




The module controllers


220


do not have to be completely subservient to the trajectories provided by the system controller


210


. For example, module controllers


220


can be kept abreast of how close an object gets to one of the boundaries of a trajectory envelope and use that information to improve its efforts in achieving a task.




The trajectories and trajectory envelopes discussed above are discussed in terms of position, velocity and/or acceleration as functions of time. However, the trajectories and trajectory envelopes are not limited to these expressions, and can include any data relating to an object.




In the various exemplary embodiments discussed in detail above, the modular object handling systems use a two-layered hierarchical architecture, i.e., a single system controller and multiple module controllers. However, the modular object handling systems and methods according to this invention can use any number of layers of control, such as, for example, at least one intermediate control layer between the system controller and the module controllers. Moreover, the modular object handling systems and methods according to this invention can include multiple system controllers.




The modular object handling systems and methods according to this invention can include both predetermined collision and control envelopes. Alternatively, the modular object handling systems and methods according to this invention can use only predetermined collision envelopes or only predetermined control envelopes. Further, the predetermined trajectories and trajectory envelopes do not have to relate to collision and control borders and regions. Instead, the trajectories and trajectory envelopes can relate to any task or constraint. For example, multiple trajectory envelopes can be provided for different object sizes.




Also, in the various exemplary embodiments discussed in detail above, the modular object handling systems are described in terms of an object entering, exiting, or being within module actuators


230


. However, the systems, trajectories and trajectory envelopes can also be described in terms of the object entering, exiting, or being within modules associated with each of the module actuators


230


. Such modules could further be described as regions of the path


240


that are under the control of the module actuators


230


.




The various controllers of the each of the multi-level modular object handling systems described above can be implemented using a programmed general purpose computer. However, the various controllers of the each of the multi-level modular object handling systems described above can also be implemented on a special purpose computer, a programmed microprocessor or microcontroller and peripheral integrated circuit elements, an ASIC or other integrated circuit, a digital signal processor, a hardwired electronic or logic circuit such as a discrete element circuit, a programmable logic device such as a PLD, PLA, FPGA or PAL, or the like. In general, any device, capable of implementing a finite state machine that is in turn capable of implementing the flowcharts shown in

FIGS. 5-7

and


9


, can be used to implement the various controllers of the each of the multi-level modular object handling systems described above.




The communication links


250


can be any known or later developed device or system for connecting the system controller


210


, module controllers


220


, and the module actuators


230


, including a direct cable connection, a connection over a wide area network or a local area network, a connection over an intranet, a connection over the Internet, or a connection over any other distributed processing network or system. In general, the communication links


250


can be any known or later developed connection system or structure usable to connect the system controller


210


, module controllers


220


, and the module actuators


230


.




While the systems and methods of this invention have been described in conjunction with the specific embodiments outlined above, it is evident that many alternatives, modifications and variations will be apparent to those skilled in the art. Accordingly, the exemplary embodiments of the systems and methods of this invention, as set forth above, are intended to be illustrative, not limiting. Various changes may be made without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention.



Claims
  • 1. A method of handling objects, comprising:selecting one of a plurality of objects to be handled; selecting one trajectory of a set of predetermined trajectories in a trajectory space to accomplish a system function, the selected predetermined trajectory having a trajectory envelope that indicates at least one criterion of interest; determining an actual position in the trajectory space of the selected object; determining whether the actual position in the trajectory space of the selected object is within the trajectory envelope of the selected predetermined trajectory; and selecting another trajectory of the set of predetermined trajectories upon determining that the actual position in the trajectory space of the specified object is not within the trajectory envelope of the selected predetermined trajectory.
  • 2. The method according to claim 1, further comprising controlling the object based upon whether the actual position in the trajectory space of the specified object is within the trajectory envelope.
  • 3. The method according to claim 1, wherein specifying another trajectory includes specifying another trajectory of the multiple trajectories that is closest to the actual position in the trajectory space of the specified object.
  • 4. The method according to claim 1, wherein specifying another trajectory includes specifying another trajectory of the multiple trajectories based upon proximity to the actual position in the trajectory space of the specified object and proximity to the one specified trajectory.
  • 5. The method according to claim 1, wherein specifying another trajectory includes specifying another trajectory that is closest to the actual position in the trajectory space of the specified object while also being adjacent to the one specified trajectory.
  • 6. The method according to claim 1, further including determining a trajectory in the trajectory space for another object.
  • 7. The method according to claim 6, further including specifying a minimum allowed gap separating the trajectory in the trajectory space of the other object from the specified trajectory in the trajectory space of the specified object.
  • 8. The method according to claim 7, further including modifying the trajectory in the trajectory space of the other object upon determining that the trajectory in the trajectory space of the other object is separated from the other specified trajectory of the one specified object by a distance less than the minimum allowed gap.
  • 9. An object handling apparatus usable with objects that are movable along a path, comprising:a device that determines an actual position in a trajectory space of a specified object; at least one actuator that performs an operation on the specified object; at least one module controller that controls the operation of the at least one actuator; a system controller that plans a system function based on the operation of the at least one actuator and based on whether the actual position in the trajectory space of the specified object is within a trajectory envelope, the trajectory envelope indicating control criteria of interest relative to one specified trajectory among multiple trajectories in the trajectory space that accomplishes the system function, the system controller specifying another trajectory of the multiple trajectories other than the one specified trajectory upon a determination that the actual position in the trajectory space of the specified object is not within the trajectory envelope.
  • 10. The object handling apparatus according to claim 9, further comprising a memory that stores multiple predetermined trajectories and a predetermined trajectory envelope for each predetermined trajectory.
  • 11. The object handling apparatus according to claim 10, wherein the memory stores a collision envelope.
  • 12. The object handling apparatus according to claim 10, wherein the memory stores a collision envelope that is defined between an early collision boundary that indicates the earliest time that the specified object can embark from a location and not collide with another object, and a late collision boundary that indicates the latest time that the specified object can embark from the location and not collide with another object.
  • 13. The object handling apparatus according to claim 10, wherein the memory stores a control envelope for each predetermined trajectory.
  • 14. The object handling apparatus according to claim 10, wherein the memory stores a control envelope that is defined between an early collision boundary that indicates the earliest time that the specified object can embark from a location and still accomplish a task, and a late collision boundary that indicates the latest time that the specified object can embark from the location and still accomplish the task.
  • 15. The object handling apparatus according to claim 10, wherein the memory stores multiple trajectory envelopes.
  • 16. The object handling apparatus according to claim 10, wherein the memory stores multiple trajectory envelopes for each of the multiple trajectories that indicate different control criteria of interest.
  • 17. The object handling apparatus according to claim 9, wherein the at least one module controller determines a proximity of the actual position of the specified object to boundaries that define the trajectory envelope, and controls the at least one actuator to accomplish the system function with improved efficiency based upon the proximity.
  • 18. The object handling apparatus according to claim 9, wherein the system controller specifies another trajectory of the multiple trajectories that is closest to the actual position in the trajectory space of the specified object.
  • 19. The object handling apparatus according to claim 9, wherein the system controller specifies another trajectory of the multiple trajectories based upon proximity to the actual position in the trajectory space of the specified object and proximity to the one specified trajectory.
  • 20. The object handling apparatus according to claim 19, wherein the system controller specifies another trajectory that is closest to the actual position in the trajectory space of the specified object while also being adjacent to the one specified trajectory.
  • 21. The object handling apparatus according to claim 9, wherein the system controller determines a trajectory in the trajectory space for another object.
  • 22. The object handling apparatus according to claim 21, wherein the system controller specifies a minimum allowed gap separating the trajectory in the trajectory space of the other object from the specified trajectory in the trajectory space of the specified object.
  • 23. The object handling apparatus according to claim 22, wherein the system controller modifies the trajectory in the trajectory space of the other object upon a determination that the trajectory in the trajectory space of the other object is separated from the other specified trajectory of the one specified object by a distance less than the minimum allowed gap.
US Referenced Citations (8)
Number Name Date Kind
5023808 Seraji Jun 1991
5058024 Inselberg Oct 1991
5129045 Stelzer et al. Jul 1992
5390288 Toda et al. Feb 1995
5502638 Takenaka Mar 1996
5511147 Abdel-Malek Apr 1996
5999758 Rai et al. Dec 1999
6002890 Jackson et al. Dec 1999
Foreign Referenced Citations (1)
Number Date Country
002582245-A1 Nov 1986 FR
Non-Patent Literature Citations (2)
Entry
Behera et al., Neuro-adaptive Hybird Controller for Robot-Manipulator Tracking Control, 1996, IEEE, pp.270-275.*
Canny, On Computability of Fine Motion Plans, 1989, IEEE, pp. 177-182.