To perform planetary exploration without human supervision, a complete autonomous rover must be able to model its environment while exploring its surroundings. Researchers present a new algorithm to construct a geometric terrain representation from a single range image. The form of the representation is an elevation map that includes uncertainty, unknown areas, and local features. By virtue of working in spherical-polar space, the algorithm is independent of the desired map resolution and the orientation of the sensor, unlike other algorithms that work in Cartesian space. They also describe new methods to evaluate regions of the constructed elevation maps to support legged locomotion over rough terrain

Caillas, C.

Hebert, M.

Kanade, Takeo

Krotkov, E.

Kweon, I. S.

English

NASA Technical Reports Server

N90-29066
First Results in Terrain Mapping
for a Roving Planetary Explorer
E. Krotkov, C. Caillas, M. Hebert, I. S. Kweon, T. Kanade
The Robotics Institute
Carnegie Mellon University
Pittsburgh, PA 15213
Abstract I
To perform planetary exploration without human supervision, a complete autonomous rover
must be able to model its environment while exploring its surroundings. We present a new
algorithm to construct a geometric terrain representation from a single range image. The form
of the representation is an elevation map that includes uncertainty, unknown areas, and local
features. By virtue of working in spherical-polar space, the algorithm is independent of the
desired map resolution and the orientation of the sensor, unlike other algorithms that work in
Cartesian space. We also describe new methods to evaluate regions of the constructed elevation
maps to support legged locomotion over rough terrain.
1 Introduction
We are prototyping a legged vehicle called the Ambler (fig. 1) for an exploratory mission on
another planet, conceivably Mars, where it is to traverse uncharted areas and collect material
samples. Planetary exploration poses significant challenges for rovers: unprecedented levels of
autonomy and reliability due to communication delays that limit conventional Earth-based teleop-
erafion; and traversal of rugged, Lrregular terrain for which existing mechanisms and perception
techniques are inadequate.
Papers that describe the background of our work include a comprehensive account of the
Ambler configuration [1] and an overview of the integrated research program [4]. The aim of
this paper is to describe first results from the Ambler perception system.
The Ambler perception system must build and maintain representations of the terrain and
discrete obj_errain maps that are appropriate for a wide variety of tasks, each with different
requirements. For example, locomotion and sampling require detailed, local representations,
while navigation and mission planning demand broad, global descriptions. In this paper, we do
not address the full scope of the perception system; we focus only on building maps based on
the observations of a single sensor, and using those maps to support locomotion.
This paper addreses sensing in section 2, and presents a new technique for constructing
elevation maps in section 3. It describes methods for analyzing map geometry for locomotion
1This research was sponsored by NASA under Colatract NAGW-1175. The views and conclusions contained
in this document are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as represenling the official policies, either
expressed _r implied, of the funding agency.
247
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=19900019750 2020-03-19T21:34:43+00:00Z
4 ft m
2m--_
| lit
-1 n
-2 m
Figure 1: The Ambler drawn at shown scale (left) and another scale (right)
in section 4, and documents experimental methods and results in section 5. It concludes by
discussing limitiafions and future work.
2 Active Range Sensing
The Ambler perception system will use multiple sensing modalities, both imaging and non-
imaging. Here we concentrate on active range sensors, which measure the distance to an object
in the environment by observing the reflection of a reference signal (sonar, laser, radar, etc.)
from the object. Active sensors offer two chief advantages: they provide range data without
the numerous computations required by passive techniques such as stereo vision; and they are
largely insensitive to illumination conditions, thus simplifying the image analysis problem. 2
We use a scanning laser range finder, developed by ERIM, that measures the phase difference
between an amplitude-modulated laser beam and its reflection from a point in the scene [7]. We
measure the coordinates of the point in a non standard spherical polar reference frame, in which
p is the measured range, and _ and 8 are the vertical and horizontal scanning angles of the beam
direction corresponding to row and column position in the image. The Cartesian coordinates of
a point measured in spherical polar coordinates have been derived [3] as
x= psin8 , y=pcosdcos8 , z= psin_cos8 (1)
2This is especially important for images of outdoor scenes in which illumination can be neither controlled nor
predicted.
248
3 Elevation Map Construction
Applying eq. 1 to the measurements in a range image yields an elevation map. However,
this map is non-uniform in Cartesian space, because the coordinate transformation is non-linear.
Further, the map grows less dense and less accurate with increasing distance from the sensor.
One could circumvent the former difficulty by using a map structure that is not a regularly
spaced grid, such as a Delaunay triangulation [5]. However, this is not practical because of the
complex algorithms required to access data points and their neighborhoods.
Another approach is to interpolate between data points to build a dense elevation map on a
grid, either by approximating the surface between data points (e.g., as a bicubic surface), or by
globally fitting a surface under some smoothness assumptions (e.g., regularization). However,
both of these approaches have signticant limitations: they make assumptions on the local shape
of the terrain which may not be valid in the case of rough terrain; and they depend heavily on
the resolution and position of the grid (i.e., they cannot compute an estimate of the elevation at
an (x. y) position that is not a grid point without resampling the grid).
We propose an alternative, the locus algorithm, that uses a model of the sensor to interpolate
at arbitrary resolution without making any assumptions on the terrain shape other than the
continuity of the surface.
3.1 Locus Algorithm
The problem of finding the elevation z of a point (x. y) is equivalent to computing the intersection
of the surface observed by the sensor with the vertical line passing through (x. y). The basic
idea of the locus algorithm is to convert the latter formulation into a problem in image space 3
(fig. 2). A vertical line 4 is a locus (curve) in image space, whose equation as a function of o is
derived by inverting eq. 1, assuming x and y constant:
_ co--_-_o x cosp = pt(o) = y2 + F , O= OKb) = aretan-- (2)
Y
Similarly, the range image can be viewed as a surface p = I(o. a) in 6, a, p space. The problem
then is to find the intersection, if it exists, between a curve parameterized by c) and a discrete
surface. Since the surface is known only from a sample of data, the intersection cannot be
computed analytically.
Instead, we must search along the curve for the intersection point. Let 0t(o) be the image
column closest to at(o), and let _3(oj) = pt(oj)- l(oj. 0t(oj)). The search proceeds in two
stages. First, we locate the two scanlines of the range image, 6_ and 02, between which the
intersection must be located, i.e., such that sgn.3(oi) # sgn.3(o2). Second, we apply a binary
search between ol and o2. The search stops when to, - 0,.11 < e (i.e., the resolution of the
elevation is controlled by the parameter e). Third, since there are no pixels between o l and o2,
3Specifically, spherical-polar space raaher than row-column space.
4We have generalized the locus algorithm from the case of a vertical line to the case of a general line in space
[3], which allows us to build maps using any reference plane, not just the xy plane. We present the case of the
vertical line to simplify exposition.
249
z I _ _HO_
X
Dcp_ Profile le _'
(I,ro)cc_on of H(X)
on image)
Figure 2: Imaging geometry (left) and one-dimensional locus (right)
we perform Lagrangian interpolation for ol < o < 02, using as control points the four pixels
that surround the intersection point.
The result is a value o that is mapped to p and 0 by eq. 2, and then mapped to an elevation
value by eq. 1. Repeating this for vertical lines at every desired (x. y) point yields a dense
elevation map of the desired resolution, as required.
3.2 Range Shadows
Objects in the environment may cast range shadows (cause occlusions). It is important to identify
the occluded regions, because ff we apply the locus algorithm there directly, then the surface
would be smoothly interpolated, possibly incone, ctly. In turn, this couid lead the rover to plan
a path through that region, expecting it to be traversable when in fact it is unknown.
One could detect empty regions in the elevation map given by ecI. 1, without interpolation.
This does not work, because the size of the shadow regions may be on the order of the average
distance between data points:
Another approach is to incorporate the detection of shadow regions into the locus algorithm,
again working in image space. We observe that a range shadow corresponds to an occluding edge
in the image. As in fig. 3, an (x. y) location in the map is in a shadow area if its locus intersects
the image at a pixel that lies on such an edge. We implement this idea by first detecting edges
in the range image by using the GNC algorithm [2]. Then, when we apply the locus algorithm
and observe that the locus of a given location intersects the image at an edge pixel, we mark
that location as lying in a range shadow.
range profile in image
___.... HOt3
_--- edge pixel
#
Figure 3: Shadowed area (left) and range discontinuity (right)
SThis is especially true for distant regionsin which the distribution of data points is sparse.
250
3.3 Uncertainty
We have developed a probabilistic model of the uncertainty on the sensor measurements, ac-
cording to which the measured range errors are normally distributed with standard deviation
proportional to the square of measured range ([3], p. 7). The range measurement uncertainty is
eaiented along the direction of measurement (fig. 4).
To identify the uncertainty on the elevation value at each grid point (x,y), as part of the
locus algorithm we transform the uncertainty on a sensor measurement so that it is oriented
along the z axis ([3], pp. 25-27). This conversion is non trivial, since the the range uncertainty
is distributed across a region in the elevation map. According to this model, the distribution of
elevation errors is approximately normal, with standard deviation proportional to the product of
measured range and elevation.
S
Figure 4: One-dimensional uncertainty distributions on sensor and map
4 Footfall Evaluation
A peTceptual task unique to legged locomotion is to evaluate terrain regions as footfall loca-
tions (foot placements). This is essential for locomotion over the rugged terrain that could be
encountered on the surface of other planets such as Mars. In this section, we describe several
methods to evaluate elevation map regions as footfall locations. These methods operate on the
geometric structure of the surface described by the elevation map, for now ignoring important
material properties of the soil such as load-bearing strength, compliance, and coefficient of fric-
tion. While incomplete, these methods are considerably more sophisticated than others reported
in the literature, which require operator interaction [6].
An Ambler foot is modeled by a flat disk 30 cm in diameter. The problem is to find the "best"
foot-shaped subregion B in a given region R of a given elevation map. 6 We have developed five
solutions, corresponding to different measures of "best," and present them in increasing order of
sophistication.
Max.min Find B that minimizes the difference z,,_ - z,,_ of extremal elevations, as illustrated
in fig. 5a. There are cases where this method prefers a flat surface punctuated by a single spike
rather than an undulating surface (cf. figs. 5a and 5b). This is obviously undesirable.
el'he region R is computed elsewhere based on the current heading and gall
251
Planar fit Find B that best fits a plane, subject to the constraint that the plane normal is
approximately parallel to the leg. This method suffers the same deficiency as above.
Support area Find B that minimizes the depth of penetration d_ into the soil (fig. 5c) required
to achieve the minimum necessary support area Au (contact area between foot and terrain, or
the number of map points within the circumference of the disk that are above the plane of the
foot). This method is superior to the Frevious two to the extent that it better accounts for the
shape of the terrain. However, there are cases that it fails to distinguish, e.g., two sinusoidal
surfaces with the same frequency but differem amplitudes. This method should, but does not,
select the surface with smaller amplitude variations.
Free volume Fred B that minimizes the free (unoccupied) volume between the foot and soil,
V = Nz,,_ - _-,_t zi, as shown in fig. 5b. This method correctly discriminates the two sinusoidal
surfaces described above. However, it does not take into account the distribution of "holes" in
the surface or the consequences of applying force to (stepping on) the surface.
Equilibrium Find B that minimizes V and E, where E - _/mx 2 + my 2 _ the first moment of the
s
mass distribution about the center of the font, and mx = _.m x_(z,,_ - z3. The second condition
ensures the footfall of greatest "equilibrium" (balance) with respect to holes in the surface, as
suggested by fig. 5d. The idea is that as the foot contacts sandy soil, the sand fills the holes
with a minimum of foot penetration into the soil, and as the foot contacts rocky soil, it exerts
the minimum lateral forces on potentially unstable materials.
Free N(a) (b) ,o, meu
Min
( C ) Support Area (d) contact
area
S foot _
A rain
v
0 Distance traveled
along vortical direction
Figure 5: FootfaLl evaluation criteria
Y
252
5 Experiments
In this section we summarize our initial experiments and results.
First, we evaluated the locus algorithm on synthesized range images with additive Gaussian
noise by comparing its performance to that of Cartesian space interpolation algorithms (cf.
section 3). The results show that the locus algorithm is more stable with respect to surface
orientation and noise level than the others ([3], p. 25). We conclude that this is due to performing
the interpolation in image space instead of first applying eq. 1 to the data points.
Then, we tested the locus algorithm on a variety of real range images. The left half of fig.
6 shows the result of applying it to a range image of uneven terrain found at a construction site.
The figure shows the original range image and displays the elevation map as an isoplot surface
at 10 cm resolution. The right half of fig. 6 shows an overhead view of a different elevation
map, where the grey levels indicate the following: white is shadow, black is unknown, grey
is proportional to elevation uncertainty. Note that more distant points are more uncertain, as
expected.
Figure 6: Elevation map (left), shadow regions and uncertainty (right)
Finally, we tested a partially integrated Ambler system at an experimental testbed (fig. 7):
a single leg with a fully operational controller;, the range finder mounted above the leg; and a
25 m 2 "sandbox" of terrain to be traversed. The perception system communicates with other
modules through queries, which typically are requests for the elevation map at a given resolution
within a polygonal region.
The lower left panel of fig. 8 shows the polygonal region referenced by queries for elevation,
uncertainty, and footfall location, and the other panels show the perception system's replies
253
ORtGINAU PAGE
BLACK AI_D V;H_I_ P_-.;OTOGRAPH
range
sensor
terrain
leg
SUN
Workstations
Figure 7: Single leg testbed
254
computed by the locus and equilibrium algorithms. We evaluate the selected footfall location by
servoing the leg there, thus dosing the loop between perception and action. Visual inspection
of the servoed positions shows the selected locations to be reasonably accurate; quantitative
error measurements me not yet available. Dozens of trials on different terrains suggest that the
perception algorithms provide reliable and reasonably accurate descriptions of the terrain that
suffice for moving the leg and executing footfalls. ±"
llmrmillsy _--_ ilewSll
• .N) • •
-| .0
*1.0
-4.e
-I .#
41ram IcNg
4, )¢lllill
Figure 8: Perception system replies to map and footfall location queries
6 Discussion
In this paper we presented techniques to build maps based on the observations of a single range
sensor, and to use those maps to support locomotion: a new algorithm to build elevation maps
at arbiu'ary resolution, including elevation uncertainty and unknown areas; and new methods for
geometrically evaluating areas of the constructed elevation map as foot:fall locations.
Preliminary experiments demonstrate that an integrated system can build and use maps to
select fooffaU locations. This illustrates the advantages of working in image apace rather than
in Cartesian space.
While the first results are encouraging, further work is required both in map building and
map analysis. For the former, we must complete an automatic calibration procedure to more
255
accurately relate sensor and vehicle coordinate systems. For the latter, we must investigate more
sophisticated footfall evaluations that take into account not only the local geometry of the terrain,
but also geometric uncertainty and material properties of the soft such as load-bearing strength,
compliance, and coefficient of friction. Further, we must better integrate the algorithms into the
Ambler system, and make more quantitative assessments of their performance.
The work reported in _ paper addresses a small fraction of the problems faced in developing
a complete perception system for the Ambler. The scope of future research includes two broad
categories: navigation and sampling. For the former, we aim to increase map coverage by
processing multiple views fzom multiple sensors, to determine vehicle position by landmark
triangulation, and to compute vehicle displacement by matching elevation maps. For the latter,
we intend to use surface topography to identify promising sample sites, and to build models of
discrete objects both to select particular samples and to guide sample acquisition.
References
[1] J. Bares and W. Whittaker. Configuration of an Autonomous Robot for Mars Exploration. In
Proc. World Robotics Conference, Society of Mechanical Engineers, To appear, May 1989.
[2] A. Blake and A. Zisserman. Visual Reconstruction. MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts,
1987.
[3] M. Hebert, T. Kanade, and I. Kweon. 3-D Vision Techniques for Autonomous Vehicles.
Technical Report CMU-RI-TR-88-12, The Robotics Institute, Carnegie Mellon University,
1988.
[4] E. Krotkov, J. Bares, M. Hebert, T. Kanade, T. Mitchell, R. Simmons, and W. Whittaker.
An Autonomous Rover for Exploring Mars. IEEE Computer, To appear, June 1989.
[5] D.J. Orser and M. Roche. The Extraction of Topographic Features in Support of Autonomous
Underwater Vehicle Navigation. In Proc. Fifth Internan'onal Symposium on Unmanned
Untethered Submersible Technology, Merrimack, New Hampshire, June 1987.
[6] E Ozguner, S. J. Tsai, and R. B. McGhee. An Approach to the Use of Terrain-Preview
Information in Rough-Terrain Locomotion by a Hexapod Walking Machine. International
Journal of Robotics Research, 3(2):134-146, Summer 1984.
[7] D. Zuk, E Pont, R. Franklin, and V. Iatrmwe. A System for Autonomous Land Navigation.
Technical Report IR-85-540, Enviroranental Research Institute of Michigan, Ann Arbor,
Michigan, 1985.
256


First results in terrain mapping for a roving planetary explorer

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

NASA Technical Reports Server