无人驾驶农机曲率自适应轨迹规划与跟踪控制协同优化方法

    Collaborative Optimization Method of Curvature-Adaptive Trajectory Planning and Tracking Control for Autonomous Agricultural Machinery

    • 摘要: 针对无人驾驶农机现有路径规划方法受限于规则化地块或特定场景,路径与速度规划割裂,控制精度不足且稳定性差的问题,本文提出一种轨迹规划与跟踪控制协同优化方法。在轨迹规划方面,采用Fields2cover全覆盖路径规划方法,结合路径曲率自适应高低速切换策略和S型速度曲线规划,以生成高效的全覆盖轨迹。在跟踪控制方面,基于阿克曼转向模型设计改进型线性二次调节器(Linear Quadratic Regulator, LQR),结合路径曲率自适应权重矩阵调节机制和目标转向角预瞄策略,以提升轨迹跟踪精度。仿真结果表明,使用改进型LQR的无人驾驶农机平均横向和航向角误差分别为0.015 m和0.005 rad,与传统LQR、预瞄LQR、纯跟踪、Stanley四类跟踪控制方法相比,平均横向误差分别降低50.0%、28.6%、21.1%和40.0%,平均航向角误差分别降低28.6%、16.7%、16.7%和64.3%。无人驾驶实车测试中改进型LQR的平均横向和航向角误差分别为0.047 m和0.018 rad,相比上述四类跟踪控制方法,平均横向误差分别降低48.9%、30.9%、13.0%和56.5%,平均航向角误差分别降低40.0%、30.8%、18.2%和71.0%。同时,改进型LQR在仿真和实车试验中的速度误差均为最低,进一步验证了该方法的有效性与稳定性。研究成果可为智能农机在复杂农田场景下的高精度轨迹规划与稳定自主作业提供技术支撑。

       

      Abstract: The shortage of agricultural workers and rising operational costs are increasing the demand for autonomous farm machinery. However, current technical solutions face several challenges, including dependence on regular-shaped fields, separation between path planning and velocity planning, and inadequate control accuracy in complex environments. This paper aimed to develop an integrated trajectory planning and tracking control method to enhance the operational performance of unmanned agricultural machinery under realistic field conditions. This paper proposed a cooperative optimization framework that integrated trajectory planning with tracking control. For the trajectory planning, the Fields2Cover library was employed to generate full-coverage paths for irregular fields, utilizing multiple objective functions, swath sorting methods, and turning connection strategies. To address the disconnection between path and velocity planning, an adaptive velocity switching strategy based on path curvature was introduced, combined with S-curve velocity profiling to ensure smooth velocity transitions. For tracking control, an improved Linear Quadratic Regulator (LQR) controller was designed based on an Ackermann steering kinematic model. The key innovation was a curvature-adaptive weight matrix adjustment mechanism that dynamically optimized the controller's parameters according to real-time path curvature. Additionally, a target steering angle preview feedforward strategy was implemented to reduce overshoot and enhance tracking precision during curves. Comprehensive simulation and real-world experiments demonstrated the effectiveness of the proposed method. In the simulation ablation study, the preview LQR reduced the mean and maximum lateral errors by 30.0% and 33.6% compared to traditional LQR, demonstrating the independent contribution of the preview mechanism in suppressing curve overshoot. Regarding overall performance, compared with traditional LQR, preview LQR, pure pursuit, and Stanley methods, the improved LQR reduced the mean lateral error by 50.0%, 28.6%, 21.1%, and 40.0%, and the maximum lateral error by 49.6%, 24.1%, 4.3%, and 59.8%, respectively. For heading error, the improved LQR achieved mean and maximum values of 0.005 rad and 0.064 rad, reducing the mean heading error by 28.6%, 16.7%, 16.7%, and 64.3%, and the maximum heading error by 31.9%, 28.1%, 29.7%, and 77.6% compared to the four benchmark methods. The velocity errors were also minimized at 0.014 m/s (mean) and 0.036 m/s (maximum). Real-vehicle tests on uneven grassland further validated the method's robustness. Quantitative analysis of the ablation group showed that compared to traditional LQR, the preview LQR reduced the mean and maximum lateral errors by 26.1% and 23.3%, and the mean and maximum heading error by 13.3% and 3.9%, effectively validating the mechanism's role in enhancing heading stability. Furthermore, compared to traditional LQR, preview LQR, pure pursuit, and Stanley methods, the improved LQR reduced the mean lateral error by 48.9%, 30.9%, 13.0%, and 56.5%, and the maximum lateral error by 43.9%, 26.9%, 22.8%, and 72.7%, respectively. The mean heading error reached 0.018 rad, representing reductions of 40.0%, 30.8%, 18.2%, and 71.0% compared to the four benchmark methods. Although the maximum heading error showed a 15.5% increase compared to pure pursuit, it decreased by 9.4%, 5.7% and 49.8% compared to traditional LQR, preview LQR, and Stanley. In velocity tracking, the improved LQR exhibited the smallest fluctuations, confirming superior stability under challenging field conditions. The integrated path-velocity-control cooperative optimization solution presented in this paper significantly enhanced tracking accuracy, operational smoothness, and field adaptability of unmanned agricultural machinery. This approach effectively addressed key limitations of traditional methods through synergistic planning and adaptive control. Therefore, this study can provide a solid technical foundation for the deployment of intelligent agricultural equipment in irregular terrains. Future research will explore reinforcement learning for automated parameter tuning to further improve system adaptability and deployment efficiency.

       

    /

    返回文章
    返回