This specification relates generally to contact sensors for a mobile robot. One exemplary contact sensor described herein is a bumper for determining contact between a robotic lawn mower and objects in the path of the robotic lawn mower.
A mobile robot operates by navigating around an environment. The mobile robot can include a shell, which contacts obstacles that the mobile robot encounters in its travels. The mobile robot can modify its behavior in response to detecting that the shell has contacted an obstacle in the environment. For example, the mobile robot can back-away from the obstacle, or otherwise alter its path.
Described herein are example robots configured to traverse outdoor surfaces, such as grass or pavement, and perform various operations including, but not limited to, cutting grass. These robots can encounter obstacles, which can impede their progress. For example, during operation, the robot may contact an obstacle, such as a post, a bird bath, a ramp, a wall, etc. A determination is made (e.g. on board) that the robot has made contact with an obstacle based on a displacement of the shell of the robot relative to the chassis of the robot. A controller identifies the magnitude and direction of the shell's displacement based on signals output from a sensor assembly, which detects movement of the shell relative to the chassis.
In one aspect, a mobile robot includes a chassis, a shell moveably mounted on the chassis by a shell suspension system, and a sensor assembly configured to sense a distance and a direction of shell movement relative to the chassis. The sensor assembly further includes a magnet disposed on an underside of the shell. The sensor assembly further includes three or more Hall effect sensors disposed on the chassis in a triangular pattern at fixed distances such that the three or more Hall effect sensors are positioned beneath the magnet when no force is applied to the shell, wherein relative motion between the magnet and the Hall effect sensors causes the sensors to produce differing output signals. The mobile robot also includes a controller configured to receive output signals from the Hall effect sensors and to determine a distance and a direction of movement of the shell relative to the chassis.
In some implementations, the magnet is sized based on an amount of shell movement relative to the chassis allowed by the suspension system. In some cases, the magnet is rectangular and a center of the rectangular magnet aligns axially with a center of the triangular pattern.
In some implementations, a center of the magnet and a center of the triangular pattern are located along the center line of the robot.
In some implementations, the shell suspension system includes a plurality of suspension posts, each suspension post including a spring and a locking mechanism configured to couple the chassis to the shell. In some cases, the spring has a spring constant in the range of 2 to 10 N/mm. In some cases, each suspension post is located near a corner of the shell.
In some implementations, the sensor assembly is configured to sense at least eight differing states of contact with the shell.
In some implementations, based on the outputs from the sensors, the controller is configured to determine an angle at which the shell contacted an obstacle and determines a sequence of movements to move the mobile robot around the obstacle.
In some implementations, the center of the triangular pattern is positioned no further than 11 centimeters from the center of the chassis.
In some implementations, each of the Hall effect sensors is surrounded by a coil.
In some implementations, the sensor assembly senses no contact with an obstacle when each of the Hall effect sensors is covered by the magnet.
In some implementations, the three or more Hall effect sensors are co-located on a circuit board with a footprint area between 15 and 30 square centimeters.
In some implementations, the three or more Hall effect sensors are co-located on a circuit board and the ratio of the area of the circuit board to the area of the shell is between 150:1 and 300:1.
In some implementations, the mobile robot further includes a charge pump and a capacitor, wherein the charge pump and the capacitor are electrically connected to at least one motor of the mobile robot. In some cases, the at least one motor of the mobile robot can only operate when the capacitor is charged. In some cases, the capacitor cannot be charged unless at least one of the plurality of Hall effect sensors is covered by the magnet.
In another aspect, a method of detecting contact between a mobile robot and an obstacle includes sensing, with a sensor assembly comprising a magnet disposed on a shell of the mobile robot and three or more Hall effect sensors disposed on a chassis of the mobile robot, an analog response of three or more Hall effect sensors based on an orientation of the magnet in relation to the Hall effect sensors. The method also includes receiving, at a controller, signals provided by the three or more Hall effect sensors of the sensor assembly. The method also includes determining, by the controller, a distance and a direction of movement of the shell relative to the chassis. The method also includes modifying the behavior of the mobile robot based on the distance and direction of movement of the shell relative to the chassis.
In some implementations, determining a distance and a direction of movement of the shell relative to the chassis comprises determining from which of at least eight differing states of contact with the shell the contact occurred.
In some implementations, determining a distance and a direction of movement of the shell relative to the chassis comprises determining an angle at which the mobile robot contacted an obstacle.
In some implementations, determining a distance and a direction of movement of the shell relative to the chassis comprises using a look-up table.
In some implementations, the method further includes cutting power to a motor of the mobile robot if none of the Hall effect sensors sense the magnet.
In some implementations, the method further includes sending an electrical current through a coil surrounding a Hall effect sensor of the sensor assembly and determining, at a controller, whether the sensor assembly is functioning properly.
In some implementations, modifying the behavior of the mobile robot includes identifying and providing an instruction to a drive system of the mobile robot based on the distance and direction of shell movement relative to the chassis. In some cases, the instruction comprises a command to execute an obstacle avoidance maneuver. In some cases, the avoidance maneuver comprises a command for the mobile robot to back up a computed distance from the obstacle. In some cases, identifying and providing an instruction for a drive system of the mobile robot comprises using machine learning.
Advantages of the foregoing may include, but are not limited to, those described below and herein elsewhere. The sensor assembly can generate a range of signals in response to contact with the shell and thus can provide more than a binary “bump” or “no bump” signal to the controller, allowing for more accurate obstacle detection. Additionally, the small, sensitive sensor assembly allowing for more accurate obstacle detection being included in the large-shelled mobile robot allows the large robot, with a large turning radius, to navigate around obstacles in tight spaces. Additionally, portions of the sensor assembly described herein, including the circuit board, may be encased in order to shield the sensors from water and debris which will be contacted by the outdoor lawn mowing robot.
Another advantage of the mobile robot is its suspension system, which is designed to be stiff in the lateral (e.g. horizontal) directions such the robot does not register a bump when moving across dense or stiff grass types. The suspension system is also designed to allow easy coupling and decoupling of the shell and the chassis of the mobile robot while allowing six degrees of freedom of movement between the shell and the chassis.
The robots and techniques described herein, or portions thereof, can be controlled by a computer program product that includes instructions that are stored on one or more non-transitory machine-readable storage media, and that are executable on one or more processing devices to control (e.g., to coordinate) the operations described herein. The robots described herein, or portions thereof, can be implemented as all or part of an apparatus or electronic system that can include one or more processing devices and memory to store executable instructions to implement various operations.
The details of one or more implementations are set forth in the accompanying drawings and the description below. Other features and advantages will be apparent from the description and drawings, and from the claims.
Described herein are example robots configured to traverse outdoor surfaces, such as grass or pavement, and perform various operations including, but not limited to, cutting grass. These robots can encounter obstacles, which can impede their progress. For example, during operation, the robot may contact an obstacle, such as a post, a bird bath, a ramp, a wall, etc. A determination is made (e.g. on board) that the robot has made contact with an obstacle based on a displacement of the shell of the robot relative to the chassis of the robot. A controller identifies the magnitude and direction of the shell's displacement based on signals output from a sensor assembly, which detects movement of the shell relative to the chassis.
Sensors that may be enclosed (or otherwise shielded from the effects of weather) while retaining their functionality, including Hall sensors and inductive sensors, can be used on an outdoor robot, such as a lawn mowing robot. For example, the robotic lawn mower may include one or more arrays of Hall effect sensors stationary relative to the chassis and one or more magnets disposed on the moveable shell of the robot. In some implementations, the sensor assembly may be disposed on the shell of the robot and the magnet may be disposed on the chassis. The shell can move relative to the chassis in response to contact with an obstacle. Each Hall effect sensor provides electrical signals depending on the position of the magnet relative to that particular sensor. These electrical signals can be interpreted (e.g., processed) by a controller to identify attributes of the contact with the obstacle, such as a location of contact with the obstacle, an angle of contact with the obstacle, and a force of contact with the obstacle. A sensor assembly including an array of Hall effect sensors, such as those described herein, can be advantageous compared to a mechanical switch because the Hall effect sensors can generate a range of electrical signals (e.g. an analog signal having a range of values) in response to contact with the shell and thus can provide more than binary “bump” or “no bump” indications of obstacle detection.
Returning briefly to
As the shell 102 of the robot 100 is displaced relative to the chassis 112, the sensor assembly 700 senses a direction and a distance of the relative motion of the shell 102 utilizing a magnet 302 mounted on the shell 102. In implementations, the center of the magnet 302 sits on or near a center line 318 between the right and left side portions 314, 316 of the shell 102. It is preferred to have the magnet 302 as close to the center 306 of the robot 100 as possible. Centering the magnet at the center 306 of the robot 100 reduces possible effects of different length lever arms between the contact on the shell 102 and the sensor assembly 700. In implementations, sensors included in the sensor assembly form a triangular pattern. In implementations, the center of the triangular pattern, and the center of the magnet 302 is positioned no further than 5-15 centimeters from the center of the chassis, shown as distance L2.
In implementations, multiple magnets may be used. For example, a magnet may be disposed on the shell 102 above each of the sensors included in the sensor assembly. In implementations, multiple sensor arrays may also be used. For example, multiple sensor arrays may be disposed on the chassis 112 and one or more magnets may be disposed on the shell 102 each corresponding to one of the sensor arrays.
As shown in
Suspension posts 114a-114d couple the shell 102 to the chassis 112 while allowing for simple decoupling of the shell 102 from the chassis 112.
It is advantageous for the suspension system to be stiff in the lateral (e.g. horizontal) directions because some grass types (especially those types that are particularly dense or stiff) may be registered by the robot 100 as a bump when moving across the grass. Registering a bump upon contacting grass with the shell 102 is undesired, as the robot 100 is intended to drive over, and cut, the grass. However, in the axial (e.g. vertical) direction, the suspension system does not need to be particularly stiff because the robot 100 must be able to sense when the shell 102 of the robot 100 is being lifted in relation to the chassis 112 or wedged. Sensing a lifting of the shell 102 relative to the chassis 112 is safety-critical for a lawn mowing robot 100 because the cutting blades 110 on the underside of the robot 100 may be exposed if the robot 100 is lifted. As such, the sensing assembly is designed such that the robot 100 powers down its actuators if the shell is lifted past a certain threshold distance, which may for example, be between 3 and 8 mm.
Additionally, a suspension system that is stiff in the lateral (e.g. horizontal) directions allows for better “homing”, e.g. re-centering, of the shell 102 relative to the chassis 112. In other systems, when experiencing a light bump, friction between the coils of a spring 408 could limit the ability of a shell 102 to re-center itself relative to the chassis 112. The easier that the shell 102 re-centers itself relative to the chassis, the less need there is for re-calibration of the positioning of the shell 102 during operation. Further, in a robot such as a lawn mowing robot 100, where safety is a critical concern, shell calibration during operation of the robot 100 would be disfavored.
The sensor assembly (e.g. sensor assembly 700 shown in
In implementations, each of the three Hall effect sensors is surrounded by a coil, 614, 616, and 618, respectively, which is built into the circuit board 602. The coils may be used in running diagnostics on the sensor assembly 700 (shown in
The Hall effect sensor produces a signal (e.g. a voltage signal) based on the magnetic field being sensed. This output voltage can be sent to a controller (e.g. controller 118 shown in
When performing diagnostic testing during operation of the robot 100, the portion of the output voltage due to the magnetic field created by the electrical current running through the coil and the portion of the output voltage created by the presence of the magnet 302, can be separated. As the magnet 302 is a permanent magnet, the portion of the signal due to the magnet 302 generally has an unchanging level. A frequency component can be introduced into the signal from the excitation of the bumper (e.g. the bumper contacts an object and the magnetic field sensed due to the magnet 302 changes). The coils may be excited at a particular frequency, which allows for filtering out this portion of the output signal. Separation of the portions of the output voltage can be achieved using a band pass filter, which can also filter out high frequency noise in the system.
The portion of the output signal created by the electrical test current in the coil can be compared to a predicted output to ensure that the Hall sensor surrounded by the coil, as well as other circuitry components, such as amplifiers, are functioning properly. Electrical test currents can be input into all three coils at one time, or on individual coils. Additionally, diagnostic testing can be performed while the robot 100 is operating due to the ability to separate the portions of the output voltage due to the testing and due to normal operation above.
The magnet 302 may be sized in relation to the travel distance of the shell 102. In the front-to-back direction, the magnet's dimension should be at least as long as the total desired front-to-back shell travel. Therefore, for example, when the magnet 302 is pushed backward during a front bump, the magnetic field of the magnet 302 still covers Hall effect sensors 606 and 608. In the right-to-left direction, the magnet must be at least as long as twice the desired shell travel on one side. Therefore, for example, when the shell 102 is bumped from the right, the magnetic field of the magnet 302 still covers Hall effect sensors 604 and 608. In one embodiment, the magnet is 19 mm by 19 mm (shown by distances L3 and W3 in
The magnet 302, and the footprint of the triangle of Hall effect sensors, 604, 606, and 608, may also be sized in relation to the overall dimensions of the shell 102. In one implementation, the magnet 302 is 19 mm by 19 mm, the shell 102 is 471 by 534 mm, and the triangle separating the Hall effect sensors 604, 606, and 608 has legs of a length of approximately 21 mm, shown as distance W2 in
It is advantageous to implement a small, sensitive sensor assembly 700, such as the one described herein, on a robot 100 with a large shell (e.g., shell 102). A large-shelled robot has a larger turning radius than a smaller-shelled robot and may require more directional information to effectively navigate around an obstacle. For example, small robot may be able to navigate around an obstacle in a tight space based on knowing that it was bumped on the front of its shell. However, for a large robot with a bigger turning radius, more directional data may be required to navigate in tighter spaces. The spacing of the Hall effect sensors 604, 606, and 608, in relation to the magnet 302, allows for accurate sensing of obstacle contact over the area of the large shell, while the sensor assembly 700 takes up less space comparatively. In implementations, the Hall effect sensors 604, 606, and 608 are co-located on a circuit board 602 with a footprint area between 15 and 30 square centimeters. Additionally, in implementations, the ratio of the area of the circuit board 602 to the area of the shell 102 is between 150:1 and 300:1.
It is also advantageous to employ a sensor assembly 700 lacking mechanical parts for a robot 100 to be employed outside and exposed to the elements, including rain and varying temperatures. The circuit board 602 may be encased in order to shield the sensors 604, 606, and 608 from water and debris.
Further, using the voltages output by the sensors 604, 606, and 608, the controller 118 can determine an angle of the bump in relation to the center of the robot 100. If the controller 118 knows the specific angle at which the shell 102 of the robot 100 was bumped, it may instruct the robot 100 to perform a specific back up, or other maneuver, to avoid the obstacle that caused the bump.
Machine learning could be implemented in robot 100. As more contacts with the shell 102 of the robot 100 occur, and more robot maneuvers are commanded in response to those contacts, the controller 118 can learn which maneuvers work better for avoiding the obstacle when the contact with the obstacle occurred at a particular angle. Machine learning could lead to more efficient navigation around obstacles.
Turning back to
Referring to
Flow chart 900 also includes, receiving 904, at a controller 118, signals provided by the three or more Hall effect sensors of the sensor assembly 700. The signals provided by the three or more Hall effect sensors may be the analog responses (e.g. voltage outputs) of the sensors to the varying orientations of the magnet in relation to the sensors.
Flow chart 900 further includes, determining 906, by the controller 118, a distance and a direction of movement of the shell 102 relative to the chassis 112. For example, determining a distance and a direction of movement of the shell 102 relative to the chassis 112 may include determining from which of at least eight differing directions of contact with the shell 102 the contact occurred (e.g. right, left, front-right, front-left, lift, etc.). For example, if the shell 102 of the robot 100 made contact with an obstacle on the front portion 312 of the shell 102 (see
In another example, determining a distance and a direction of movement of the shell 102 relative to the chassis 112 includes determining an angle at which the mobile robot 100 contacted an obstacle. For example, by using a look-up table, a controller 118 may match the signals provided by the Hall effect sensors 604, 606, and 608 to values in a look-up table to determine an angle of contact.
Flow chart 900 also includes, modifying 908 the behavior of the mobile robot 100 based on the distance and direction of movement of the shell 102 relative to the chassis 112. Modifying the behavior of the mobile robot 100 includes identifying and providing an instruction to a drive system of the mobile robot 100 based on the distance and direction of shell 102 movement relative to the chassis 112. For example, as shown in
In another example, in identifying and providing an instruction for a drive system of the mobile robot 100 the controller 118 employs machine learning. As more contacts with the shell 102 of the robot 100 occur, and more robot maneuvers are commanded in response to those contacts, the controller 118 can learn which maneuvers work best for avoiding the obstacle when the contact with the obstacle occurred at a particular angle. Machine learning could lead to more efficient navigation around obstacles. For example, through machine learning, the controller 118 may learn that a contact near a corner may indicate that the robot 100 does not need to back up as far as if the contact was in the middle of one of the sides of the shell 102 in order to navigate around the obstacle. The controller 118 may learn an appropriate set distance for backing up to navigate around an obstacle based on the geometry of the contact.
Operations shown in flow chart 900 may be executed by components of the lawn mowing robot 100, including sensor assembly 700 (shown in
A computer program can be written in any form of programming language, including compiled or interpreted languages, and it can be deployed in any form, including as a stand-alone program or as a module, component, subroutine, or other unit suitable for use in a computing environment.
Operations associated with implementing all or part of the object detection techniques described herein can be performed by one or more programmable processors executing one or more computer programs to perform the functions described herein. Control over all or part of the wall following techniques described herein can be implemented using special purpose logic circuitry, e.g., an FPGA (field programmable gate array) and/or an ASIC (application-specific integrated circuit).
Processors suitable for the execution of a computer program include, by way of example, both general and special purpose microprocessors, and any one or more processors of any kind of digital computer. Generally, a processor will receive instructions and data from a read-only storage area or a random access storage area or both. Elements of a computer include one or more processors for executing instructions and one or more storage area devices for storing instructions and data. Generally, a computer will also include, or be operatively coupled to receive data from, or transfer data to, or both, one or more machine-readable storage media, such as mass PCBs for storing data, e.g., magnetic, magneto-optical disks, or optical disks. Machine-readable storage media suitable for embodying computer program instructions and data include all forms of non-volatile storage area, including by way of example, semiconductor storage area devices, e.g., EPROM, EEPROM, and flash storage area devices; magnetic disks, e.g., internal hard disks or removable disks; magneto-optical disks; and CD-ROM and DVD-ROM disks.
Elements of different implementations described herein may be combined to form other implementations not specifically set forth above. Elements may be left out of the structures described herein without adversely affecting their operation. Furthermore, various separate elements may be combined into one or more individual elements to perform the functions described herein.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
3924389 | Kita | Dec 1975 | A |
3946543 | Templeton | Mar 1976 | A |
4133404 | Griffin | Jan 1979 | A |
4163273 | Wojtkowski et al. | Jul 1979 | A |
4545453 | Yoshimura et al. | Oct 1985 | A |
4887415 | Martin | Dec 1989 | A |
4909024 | Jones et al. | Mar 1990 | A |
5204814 | Noonan et al. | Apr 1993 | A |
5341540 | Soupert et al. | Aug 1994 | A |
5438721 | Pahno et al. | Aug 1995 | A |
5446445 | Bloomfield | Aug 1995 | A |
5534762 | Kim | Jul 1996 | A |
5537711 | Tseng | Jul 1996 | A |
6049745 | Douglas et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6073427 | Nichols | Jun 2000 | A |
6133730 | Winn | Oct 2000 | A |
6140146 | Brady et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6166706 | Gallagher et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
6339735 | Peless et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6493613 | Peless et al. | Dec 2002 | B2 |
6553612 | Dyson et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6580978 | McTamaney | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6605156 | Clark et al. | Aug 2003 | B1 |
6625843 | Kim et al. | Sep 2003 | B2 |
6671592 | Bisset et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
6810305 | Kirkpatrick, Jr. | Oct 2004 | B2 |
6841963 | Song et al. | Jan 2005 | B2 |
6883201 | Jones et al. | Apr 2005 | B2 |
6941199 | Bottomley | Sep 2005 | B1 |
6999850 | McDonald | Feb 2006 | B2 |
7203576 | Wilson et al. | Apr 2007 | B1 |
7248951 | Hulden | Jul 2007 | B2 |
7360277 | Moshenrose et al. | Apr 2008 | B2 |
7389166 | Harwig et al. | Jun 2008 | B2 |
7441298 | Svendsen et al. | Oct 2008 | B2 |
7444206 | Abramson et al. | Oct 2008 | B2 |
7474941 | Kim et al. | Jan 2009 | B2 |
7503096 | Lin | Mar 2009 | B2 |
7555363 | Augenbraun et al. | Jun 2009 | B2 |
7571511 | Jones et al. | Aug 2009 | B2 |
7578020 | Jaworski et al. | Aug 2009 | B2 |
7603744 | Reindle | Oct 2009 | B2 |
7617557 | Reindle | Nov 2009 | B2 |
7620476 | Morse et al. | Nov 2009 | B2 |
7636982 | Jones et al. | Dec 2009 | B2 |
7784139 | Sawalski et al. | Aug 2010 | B2 |
7849555 | Hahm et al. | Dec 2010 | B2 |
7953526 | Durkos et al. | May 2011 | B2 |
8239992 | Schnittman et al. | Aug 2012 | B2 |
8347444 | Schnittman et al. | Jan 2013 | B2 |
8370985 | Schnittman et al. | Feb 2013 | B2 |
8392021 | Konandreas et al. | Mar 2013 | B2 |
8584305 | Won et al. | Nov 2013 | B2 |
8839477 | Schnittman et al. | Sep 2014 | B2 |
20010047321 | Peless et al. | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20020160845 | Simonsen | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20030023356 | Keable | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030055337 | Lin | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030120389 | Abramson et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030182914 | Shibata et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030234325 | Marino et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20040036618 | Ku et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
20040187249 | Jones et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040220000 | Falone et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20040244138 | Taylor et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050007057 | Peless et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050010331 | Taylor et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050015914 | You et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050020374 | Wang | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050021181 | Kim et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050076466 | Yan | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050097952 | Steph et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
20050108999 | Bucher | May 2005 | A1 |
20050113990 | Peless et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
20050217042 | Reindle | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050229340 | Sawalski et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050278094 | Swinbanks et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060020369 | Taylor et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060064828 | Stein et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060190133 | Konandreas et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060196003 | Song et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20070006404 | Cheng et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070016328 | Ziegler et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070136981 | Dilger et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070244610 | Ozick et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20080282494 | Won et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20100134104 | Riva et al. | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20110121500 | Stanforth et al. | May 2011 | A1 |
20140067124 | Williamson et al. | Mar 2014 | A1 |
20140097835 | Sartee et al. | Apr 2014 | A1 |
20150128364 | Dooley | May 2015 | A1 |
20150160298 | Tabatowski-Bush | Jun 2015 | A1 |
20150166060 | Smith | Jun 2015 | A1 |
20160081526 | Gottinger | Mar 2016 | A1 |
20160299503 | Wolfe et al. | Oct 2016 | A1 |
20160354935 | Fay et al. | Dec 2016 | A1 |
20170079499 | Schnittman et al. | Mar 2017 | A1 |
20180107224 | Bjorn | Apr 2018 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
202243772 | May 2012 | CN |
19932552 | Feb 2000 | DE |
H04320612 | Nov 1992 | JP |
5799685 | Oct 2015 | JP |
Entry |
---|
Viking, “Robotic mowers”, accessed Oct. 24, 2016, https://www.viking-garden.com/VIKING-products/Robotic-mowers/11508/Robotic-mowers.aspx (Year: 2016). |
Caracciolo et al., “Trajectory tracking control of a four-wheel differentially driven mobile robot.” IEEE Int. Conf. Robotics and Automation, Detroit, MI, (1999) pp. 2632-2638. |
Gomez et al., “A Three-Toe Biped Foot with Hall-Effect Sensing,” Sep. 28, 2015; figures 2-3; p. 3, col. 2, last paragraph; p. 4; col. 1, first paragrah (6 pages). |
Gunter, English Translation of DE 19932552, Feb. 24, 2000, 12 pages. |
International Search Report in International Application No. PCT/US16/69530, dated Apr. 7, 2017, 19 pages. |
Kimura et al., “Stuck evasion control for Active Wheel Passive-Joint snake-like mobile robot ‘Genbu’,” Proceedings of the 2004 IEEE International Converence on Robotices 8 Automation New Orleans, LA Apr. 2004, 6 pages. |
Kozlowski et al., “Modeling and control of a 4-wheel skid-steering mobile robot,” International Journal of Applied Mathematics and Computer Science, 14:477-496 (2004). |
Matthies et al., “Detecting Water Hazards for Autonomous Off-Road Navigation,” Proceedings of SPIE Conference 5083: Unmanned Ground Vehicle Technology V, Orlando, FL, Apr. 2003, pp. 231-242. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20180184583 A1 | Jul 2018 | US |