Innovation and Development of an Autonomous Airport Baggage Transportation System

121 Pages·2017·19.2 MB·English

Aalborg University Copenhagen
Manufacturing and Operations Engineering
P2 Project
Innovation and Development of an
Autonomous Airport Baggage Transportation
System
May 22, 2017
Copyright © Aalborg University 2015
FacultyofEngineeringandScience
AalborgUniversity
http://www.aau.dk
Title: Abstract:
Innovation and Development of an Au-
tonomous Airport Baggage Transportation The purpose of this project is to develop an au-
System tonomousrobotthatcanautonomouslynavigateand
avoid obstacles in a given environment. This robot
should serve as a miniature model of a vehicle that
Theme: couldpotentiallybeimplementedinairportstoopti-
Autonomousvehiclerapidprototyping,innova- mize the link between the existing baggage handling
system and airplanes. This is done with the goal of
tion tools
eliminatingerrorandincreasingthequalityoftheser-
vice. The first part of the project considers how the
Project Period: prototypecanbedevelopedusingeffectiveinnovation
Spring 2st Semester 2017 tools. The second part of the project examines how
theprototypeperforminseveraltests. Thelastpart
of the project discusses how this prototype and the
Project Group:
production of it can be optimized to increase qual-
2 ity, meet the end user requirements and eventually
beimplementedintheairportenvironment. Through
indepthtestingitwasfoundthattheprototypevery
Participant(s):
wellisabletobothnavigateandavoidobstacles,how-
Kristijonas Atkociunas everitissubjecttolimitationsanditisdependanton
Sara Bjørnevik controlled parameters. By analyzing the production
James Brewer of the prototype, it is visible that there is waste in
differentformsandalsoseveralmistakesintheman-
Marcus Kannegaard
ufacturingprocess. However,whenbeingawareofthe
Robert M¨anna wasteandmistakesitcanbeoptimizedtofittheair-
Stefan Nahstoll port environment. All over the robot fulfills its pur-
Edward Praun pose as a model and with further development and
resourcesitcouldbeperfected.
Supervisor(s):
Peder Veng Søberg
Matteo Fumagalli
Copies: 1
Page Numbers: 120
Date of Completion:
May 22, 2017
Thecontentofthisreportisfreelyavailable,butpublication(withreference)mayonlybepursuedduetoagreement
with the author.
CONTENTS
Contents
1 Introduction 6
2 Project Scope 7
2.1 Project Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.2 Prototype Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.3 Competition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3 Problem Statement 9
4 Methodology 10
4.1 Philosophies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.2 Approaches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.3 Delimitation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
4.4 Empirical Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
4.5 Brainstorm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
4.6 Mind-maps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
4.7 Kanban Chart. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
4.8 CAD Simulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
4.9 Agile Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
5 State Of The Art 15
5.1 Functionality of Autonomous Robots . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
5.2 Available Ground Handling Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
6 Theory 17
6.1 Ultrasonic Sensor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
6.2 Incremental Quadrature Encoder . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
6.3 DC motors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
6.4 Stepper motors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
6.4.1 Full stepping and half stepping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
6.4.2 Unipolar and Bipolar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
6.5 Torque . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
6.6 H-Bridges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
6.7 Odometry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
6.8 PID control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
6.8.1 Proportional control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
6.8.2 Proportional-Derivative control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
6.8.3 Proportional-Integral-Derivative control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
7 The Organisation 30
7.1 Structural Layout. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
7.2 Delay and Loss of Baggage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
7.3 Abuse of Baggage. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
3
CONTENTS
8 Prototyping 33
8.1 Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
8.2 Hardware . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
8.2.1 First Prototype . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
8.2.2 Second Prototype. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
8.3 Electronics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
8.4 Software development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
8.4.1 First Code . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
8.4.2 Second Code . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
8.4.3 Third Code . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
8.5 Firmware . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
8.5.1 Interface Diagram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
8.5.2 Code Flowchart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
8.5.3 Planning Trajectory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
8.5.4 Planting Trajectory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
8.5.5 Position . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
8.5.6 Feedback . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
8.5.7 Obstacle Avoidance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
9 Testing 53
9.1 Preliminary observations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
9.2 Test 1 - Determining K-values of PID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
9.2.1 Purpose and preliminary observations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
9.2.2 Hypothesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
9.2.3 Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
9.2.4 Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
9.2.5 Observations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
9.2.6 Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
9.2.7 Applying K-Values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
9.3 Test 2 - Testing and adjustment of PID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
9.3.1 Purpose and preliminary observations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
9.3.2 Hypothesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
9.3.3 Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
9.3.4 Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
9.3.5 Observations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
9.3.6 Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
9.4 Test 3 - Checkpoint overshoot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
9.4.1 Purpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
9.4.2 Hypothesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
9.4.3 Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
9.4.4 Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
9.4.5 Observations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
9.4.6 Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
4
CONTENTS
10 Production 75
10.1 Bill of Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
10.2 Assembly . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
10.3 Production . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
10.3.1 Standardized Production . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
10.3.2 Production Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
10.3.3 Production Simulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
11 Conceptual Prototype 86
11.1 End-user Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
11.1.1 Software . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
11.1.2 Hardware . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
11.1.3 Operational sequence in the field . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
11.1.3.1 Departure Flights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
11.1.3.2 Arrival Flights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
12 Discussion 89
12.1 Prototyping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
12.2 Considerations For Large Scale Production . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
12.3 Attainment of the end-user requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
12.4 Effect on personnel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
13 Conclusion 96
14 Appendix 102
14.1 Full Firmware Code . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
5
1 Introduction
1 Introduction
Sinceautonomoussystemswerefirstintroducedinthelate1940s,robotshavehadaconsiderable
impact in various fields, especially in production, logistics and transportation, making these sec-
tors more efficient and economical .[44] By being subject to constant development and research,
they are steadily being improved and upgraded, thereby allowing an expansion of their scope of
application. Apossibleoptimisationofbaggagehandlingsystemsatairportswouldaffiliatewith
these new operative ranges.
At present, the vast majority of airports rely on complex systems of conveyor belts which trans-
port luggage from the check-in desk or connected flight to a ‘pick-up’ area. There, the bags are
mounted onto manually operated vehicles, which transport the baggage to the aircraft. This
operational sequence, although efficient, can be further optimized. As conveyor systems are al-
ready installed in every airport, a modification or alteration of these would not be possible and
unnecessary, as these systems have been optimally designed to screen and transport baggage as
efficientlyaspossible. Utilisingautonomousrobotsinsteadofthesebeltscouldthereforeprohibit
security measures and possibly decrease transport performance.
However, when examining the last part of this conveying-sequence, the transport from the pick-
up area to the aircraft, we can see that this indeed can be innovated. By implementing an
autonomous robot in place of the standard, manually operated luggage transportation vehicle,
it would be possible to make both the conveyance between these two zones more efficient as
well as provide economic benefits, as staff, otherwise required for this specific operation, could
be released. Furthermore, this arduous work often leads to health issues of employees. These
robotswouldassistremainingpersonneltherebyleadingtoabetterworkenvironment. Moreover,
this exposition we will examine how such an autonomous robotic system can be developed and
programmed in order to fulfill the task of luggage transportation.
Asthepathfromthepick-upareatotheaircraftwillbeknownandhastobeclearlydetermined,
every system will be implemented according to the specific structural geography. The robot will
therebybeprogrammedwithafixedtrail. Thisenablesthecustomertochoosethemostefficient
route. Furthermore, in the case of the system encountering an unexpected obstacle, ultrasonic
sensors, mounted on the front of the vehicle, will instruct the system to stop and thereby evade
a potential hindrance.
In order to investigate manufacturing processes, programming and the functionality of such a
system, the performance of a miniature model will be analysed. This model will be equipped
with two motors (which will be programmed to navigate according to the terrain), an Arduino
micro-controller, a driver, and an ultrasonic sensor, which allows the vehicle to circumnavigate
possible obstacles.
A conceptual prototype and its end-user requirements will then be discussed and determined
based on this model and by looking into different organisational facets. The theoretical perfor-
mance and implementation will then be ascertained.
6
2 Project Scope
2 Project Scope
The overall goal for the project is to demonstrate how knowledge in innovation technologies,
such as CAD, rapid prototyping, modeling and simulation can be implemented for the product
development and production process. The project revolves around end-user driven innovation
processes. The project requirements are modelled according to the study curriculum, as the
prototype specifications are derived to fit the semester competition.
2.1 Project Requirements
• Plan and develop a prototype of an autonomous vehicle using the Arduino platform;
• Attempt in solving production or service related problems using programming, such as
moving packages autonomously;
• Identify,analyzeandassessthegivenprototypethroughrapidprototypingandAgileframe-
work;
• Establish requirement specifications as a basis for developing a product based on this
prototype;
• AssessthecontextualimpactsofagivenproductasanexampleinanAirportasanorgan-
isational setting;
• Assess the state of the prototype for manufacturing and relevant production processes;
• Showknowledgeandapplicationofinnovationtoolsandtechnologies,suchas3Dmodeling,
printing and laser cutting;
• Use result visualisation of the analysis process, in a form of plots, diagrams, flowcharts,
CAD drawings and simulations;
• Apply the scientific method as approach used in the project.
2.2 Prototype Requirements
• Design and construct a mobile autonomous system (robot) that can move an object from
one position to another within a specified environment;
• Central processing unit used is Arduino and the robot firmware is compiled by Arduino
integrated development environment;
• The robot is dependant on DC motors to move with integrated encoders for feedback;
• Therobotcannavigatetheenvironmentbycomputingit’spositioninthesaidenvironment
at all times;
• The robot is capable of following a planted trajectory by the use of PID controller and
feedback loop;
• The trajectory can be adjusted to fit different environments or different end-user require-
ments;
• The robot is capable to avoid fixed and moving obstacles;
7
2.3 Competition
• The robot can transport an object of at least 1kg in weight and 10x10x5 cm in size;
• The robot is sturdy enough to withstand continuous use and testing;
• The robotis designed with considerations for ease in manufacturing process and assembly;
• At least 20% of the mechanical parts are produced in-house;
2.3 Competition
The semester competition is aimed at putting the developed prototypes to the test. The com-
petition environment is constructed in a way to reflect a real life scenario of a warehouse (see
figure 1).
The environment is 3.5 x 5 meters in size and consists of fixed (shelves) as well as dynamic
obstacles. The exact position of the dynamic obstacle is not know prior to the competition.
Their purpose is to imitate moving personnel, other vehicles or temporarily placed inventory.
There are be at least two dynamic obstacles present in the competition, of which one is moving.
Thetrajectorydisplayedinthisfigureispurelyexemplaryandwasprovidedbytheorganisersof
the competition. It therefore does not necessarily depict the set way the robot should navigate.
Figure 1: Environment for the competition
8
3 Problem Statement
3 Problem Statement
As mentioned in Chapter 1, the main part of the project will aim at the development of an
autonomousvehicle,which,byusingtheArduinoUnomicrocontroller,shoulddemonstratebasic
driving,carryingandobstacleavoidancecapabilities. Thismodelshouldbeabletoautonomously
transportcargofromaspecificpointAtopointBwhilsthavingapredeterminedtrajectoryaswell
as an obstacle avoidance system installed. Furthermore, a production plan for this prototype
will be drawn while considering production in larger quantities. Based on this model and by
examiningdifferentfacetsofhowairportorganisationsarerun,thespecificend-userrequirements,
accurately tailored to airport environments, can be determined for a final conceptual prototype.
Inordertooptimallyconstructthispreliminaryprototype,variousmodellingandinnovationtools
will be used in the course of the development process. These tools are described in Chapter 4.
Thefollowingresearchquestionwillcomposetheframeworkforachievingalloftheconsiderations
mentioned above:
Whataretherelevantspecificationsformodelling,developingandmanufacturinganautonomous
robot while focusing on trajectory planning and obstacle avoidance and how could this model
inspire the development of a reliable luggage conveyance system between the baggage handling
systems of airports and aircrafts while aiming at decreasing the probability of human error?
9