Unmanned aerial vehicle path planning based on A algorithm and its variants in 3d environment
Finding a safe and optimum path from the source node to the target node, while preventing collisions with environmental obstacles, is always a challenging task. This task becomes even more complicated when the application area includes Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV). This is because UAV follows an ae...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | International journal of system assurance engineering and management 2021-10, Vol.12 (5), p.990-1000 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 1000 |
---|---|
container_issue | 5 |
container_start_page | 990 |
container_title | International journal of system assurance engineering and management |
container_volume | 12 |
creator | Mandloi, Dilip Arya, Rajeev Verma, Ajit K. |
description | Finding a safe and optimum path from the source node to the target node, while preventing collisions with environmental obstacles, is always a challenging task. This task becomes even more complicated when the application area includes Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV). This is because UAV follows an aerial path to reach the target node from the source node and the aerial paths are defined in 3D space. A* (A-star) algorithm is the path planning strategy of choice to solve path planning problem in such scenarios because of its simplicity in implementation and promise of optimality. However, A* algorithm guarantees to find the shortest path on graphs but does not guarantee to find the shortest path in a real continuous environment. Theta* (Theta-star) and Lazy Theta* (Lazy Theta-star) algorithms are variants of the A* algorithm that can overcome this shortcoming of the A* algorithm at the cost of an increase in computational time. In this research work, a comparative analysis of A-star, Theta-star, and Lazy Theta-star path planning strategies is presented in a 3D environment. The ability of these algorithms is tested in 2D and 3D scenarios with distinct dimensions and obstacle complexity. To present comparative performance analysis of considered algorithms two performance metrices are used namely computational time which is a measure of time taken to generate the path and path length which represents the length of the generated path. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s13198-021-01186-9 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2559122378</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2559122378</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c319t-c70774ea339c6651809455b23bd34a8176c8dabfaef01d2d5f314db24c34ee243</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kM1qwzAQhEVpoSHNC_Qk6FmtVpJt-RhC_yDQS3MsQrbkRMGWXckx9O2rxoXeetqBndkdPoRugd4DpcVDBA6lJJQBoQAyJ-UFWtCyyIngQl6edUZySctrtIrxSCkFBoIJukAfO99p763B2ganWzzZg6tbiwc9HvDQpp3ze1zpmCy9x2us230f3HjosPYGuzHiSaekT8J5zA22fnKh95314w26anQb7ep3LtHu6fF980K2b8-vm_WW1Kn5SOqCFoWwmvOyzvMMUlORZRXjleFCSyjyWhpdNdo2FAwzWcNBmIqJmgtrmeBLdDffHUL_ebJxVMf-FHx6qViWlcAYL2RysdlVhz7GYBs1BNfp8KWAqh-SaiapEkl1JqnKFOJzKCaz39vwd_qf1DddNXXe</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2559122378</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Unmanned aerial vehicle path planning based on A algorithm and its variants in 3d environment</title><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>Mandloi, Dilip ; Arya, Rajeev ; Verma, Ajit K.</creator><creatorcontrib>Mandloi, Dilip ; Arya, Rajeev ; Verma, Ajit K.</creatorcontrib><description>Finding a safe and optimum path from the source node to the target node, while preventing collisions with environmental obstacles, is always a challenging task. This task becomes even more complicated when the application area includes Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV). This is because UAV follows an aerial path to reach the target node from the source node and the aerial paths are defined in 3D space. A* (A-star) algorithm is the path planning strategy of choice to solve path planning problem in such scenarios because of its simplicity in implementation and promise of optimality. However, A* algorithm guarantees to find the shortest path on graphs but does not guarantee to find the shortest path in a real continuous environment. Theta* (Theta-star) and Lazy Theta* (Lazy Theta-star) algorithms are variants of the A* algorithm that can overcome this shortcoming of the A* algorithm at the cost of an increase in computational time. In this research work, a comparative analysis of A-star, Theta-star, and Lazy Theta-star path planning strategies is presented in a 3D environment. The ability of these algorithms is tested in 2D and 3D scenarios with distinct dimensions and obstacle complexity. To present comparative performance analysis of considered algorithms two performance metrices are used namely computational time which is a measure of time taken to generate the path and path length which represents the length of the generated path.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0975-6809</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 0976-4348</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s13198-021-01186-9</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New Delhi: Springer India</publisher><subject>Algorithms ; Barriers ; Computational efficiency ; Computing time ; Engineering ; Engineering Economics ; Logistics ; Marketing ; Nodes ; Optimization ; Organization ; Original Article ; Path planning ; Quality Control ; Reliability ; Safety and Risk ; Shortest-path problems ; Time measurement ; Unmanned aerial vehicles</subject><ispartof>International journal of system assurance engineering and management, 2021-10, Vol.12 (5), p.990-1000</ispartof><rights>The Society for Reliability Engineering, Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM), India and The Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden 2021</rights><rights>The Society for Reliability Engineering, Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM), India and The Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden 2021.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c319t-c70774ea339c6651809455b23bd34a8176c8dabfaef01d2d5f314db24c34ee243</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c319t-c70774ea339c6651809455b23bd34a8176c8dabfaef01d2d5f314db24c34ee243</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-0346-2150</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s13198-021-01186-9$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s13198-021-01186-9$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27923,27924,41487,42556,51318</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Mandloi, Dilip</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Arya, Rajeev</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Verma, Ajit K.</creatorcontrib><title>Unmanned aerial vehicle path planning based on A algorithm and its variants in 3d environment</title><title>International journal of system assurance engineering and management</title><addtitle>Int J Syst Assur Eng Manag</addtitle><description>Finding a safe and optimum path from the source node to the target node, while preventing collisions with environmental obstacles, is always a challenging task. This task becomes even more complicated when the application area includes Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV). This is because UAV follows an aerial path to reach the target node from the source node and the aerial paths are defined in 3D space. A* (A-star) algorithm is the path planning strategy of choice to solve path planning problem in such scenarios because of its simplicity in implementation and promise of optimality. However, A* algorithm guarantees to find the shortest path on graphs but does not guarantee to find the shortest path in a real continuous environment. Theta* (Theta-star) and Lazy Theta* (Lazy Theta-star) algorithms are variants of the A* algorithm that can overcome this shortcoming of the A* algorithm at the cost of an increase in computational time. In this research work, a comparative analysis of A-star, Theta-star, and Lazy Theta-star path planning strategies is presented in a 3D environment. The ability of these algorithms is tested in 2D and 3D scenarios with distinct dimensions and obstacle complexity. To present comparative performance analysis of considered algorithms two performance metrices are used namely computational time which is a measure of time taken to generate the path and path length which represents the length of the generated path.</description><subject>Algorithms</subject><subject>Barriers</subject><subject>Computational efficiency</subject><subject>Computing time</subject><subject>Engineering</subject><subject>Engineering Economics</subject><subject>Logistics</subject><subject>Marketing</subject><subject>Nodes</subject><subject>Optimization</subject><subject>Organization</subject><subject>Original Article</subject><subject>Path planning</subject><subject>Quality Control</subject><subject>Reliability</subject><subject>Safety and Risk</subject><subject>Shortest-path problems</subject><subject>Time measurement</subject><subject>Unmanned aerial vehicles</subject><issn>0975-6809</issn><issn>0976-4348</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kM1qwzAQhEVpoSHNC_Qk6FmtVpJt-RhC_yDQS3MsQrbkRMGWXckx9O2rxoXeetqBndkdPoRugd4DpcVDBA6lJJQBoQAyJ-UFWtCyyIngQl6edUZySctrtIrxSCkFBoIJukAfO99p763B2ganWzzZg6tbiwc9HvDQpp3ze1zpmCy9x2us230f3HjosPYGuzHiSaekT8J5zA22fnKh95314w26anQb7ep3LtHu6fF980K2b8-vm_WW1Kn5SOqCFoWwmvOyzvMMUlORZRXjleFCSyjyWhpdNdo2FAwzWcNBmIqJmgtrmeBLdDffHUL_ebJxVMf-FHx6qViWlcAYL2RysdlVhz7GYBs1BNfp8KWAqh-SaiapEkl1JqnKFOJzKCaz39vwd_qf1DddNXXe</recordid><startdate>20211001</startdate><enddate>20211001</enddate><creator>Mandloi, Dilip</creator><creator>Arya, Rajeev</creator><creator>Verma, Ajit K.</creator><general>Springer India</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0346-2150</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20211001</creationdate><title>Unmanned aerial vehicle path planning based on A algorithm and its variants in 3d environment</title><author>Mandloi, Dilip ; Arya, Rajeev ; Verma, Ajit K.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c319t-c70774ea339c6651809455b23bd34a8176c8dabfaef01d2d5f314db24c34ee243</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Algorithms</topic><topic>Barriers</topic><topic>Computational efficiency</topic><topic>Computing time</topic><topic>Engineering</topic><topic>Engineering Economics</topic><topic>Logistics</topic><topic>Marketing</topic><topic>Nodes</topic><topic>Optimization</topic><topic>Organization</topic><topic>Original Article</topic><topic>Path planning</topic><topic>Quality Control</topic><topic>Reliability</topic><topic>Safety and Risk</topic><topic>Shortest-path problems</topic><topic>Time measurement</topic><topic>Unmanned aerial vehicles</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Mandloi, Dilip</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Arya, Rajeev</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Verma, Ajit K.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>International journal of system assurance engineering and management</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Mandloi, Dilip</au><au>Arya, Rajeev</au><au>Verma, Ajit K.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Unmanned aerial vehicle path planning based on A algorithm and its variants in 3d environment</atitle><jtitle>International journal of system assurance engineering and management</jtitle><stitle>Int J Syst Assur Eng Manag</stitle><date>2021-10-01</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>12</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>990</spage><epage>1000</epage><pages>990-1000</pages><issn>0975-6809</issn><eissn>0976-4348</eissn><abstract>Finding a safe and optimum path from the source node to the target node, while preventing collisions with environmental obstacles, is always a challenging task. This task becomes even more complicated when the application area includes Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV). This is because UAV follows an aerial path to reach the target node from the source node and the aerial paths are defined in 3D space. A* (A-star) algorithm is the path planning strategy of choice to solve path planning problem in such scenarios because of its simplicity in implementation and promise of optimality. However, A* algorithm guarantees to find the shortest path on graphs but does not guarantee to find the shortest path in a real continuous environment. Theta* (Theta-star) and Lazy Theta* (Lazy Theta-star) algorithms are variants of the A* algorithm that can overcome this shortcoming of the A* algorithm at the cost of an increase in computational time. In this research work, a comparative analysis of A-star, Theta-star, and Lazy Theta-star path planning strategies is presented in a 3D environment. The ability of these algorithms is tested in 2D and 3D scenarios with distinct dimensions and obstacle complexity. To present comparative performance analysis of considered algorithms two performance metrices are used namely computational time which is a measure of time taken to generate the path and path length which represents the length of the generated path.</abstract><cop>New Delhi</cop><pub>Springer India</pub><doi>10.1007/s13198-021-01186-9</doi><tpages>11</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0346-2150</orcidid></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0975-6809 |
ispartof | International journal of system assurance engineering and management, 2021-10, Vol.12 (5), p.990-1000 |
issn | 0975-6809 0976-4348 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2559122378 |
source | SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings |
subjects | Algorithms Barriers Computational efficiency Computing time Engineering Engineering Economics Logistics Marketing Nodes Optimization Organization Original Article Path planning Quality Control Reliability Safety and Risk Shortest-path problems Time measurement Unmanned aerial vehicles |
title | Unmanned aerial vehicle path planning based on A algorithm and its variants in 3d environment |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-12T11%3A01%3A58IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Unmanned%20aerial%20vehicle%20path%20planning%20based%20on%20A%20algorithm%20and%20its%20variants%20in%203d%20environment&rft.jtitle=International%20journal%20of%20system%20assurance%20engineering%20and%20management&rft.au=Mandloi,%20Dilip&rft.date=2021-10-01&rft.volume=12&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=990&rft.epage=1000&rft.pages=990-1000&rft.issn=0975-6809&rft.eissn=0976-4348&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s13198-021-01186-9&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2559122378%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2559122378&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |