Page 278 - Sensing, Intelligence, Motion : How Robots and Humans Move in an Unstructured World
P. 278

TOPOLOGY OF ARM’S FREE CONFIGURATION SPACE  253

            the obstacle. Mathematically, the removal of such “false contacts” translates into
            the following condition, which guarantees that each CSO component has at least
            one interior point:
                                ∗
            Condition 5.8.1. Let j ∈ C satisfy (5.7); that is, there exists u ∈ L such that
                   ∗
            w = u(j ) ∈ O. For given δ> 0 and  > 0, define  O = O ∩ U(w, δ),  L =
            L ∩ U(u, δ), and  O C ={j ∈ U(j , ) :  L(j) ∩  O  =∅}. For any given γ>
                                         ∗
            0, there must exist   ∈ (0,γ ) and δ ∈ (0,γ ) such that  O C  =∅.
            Theorem 5.8.2. An obstacle in WS can map into any large but finite number of
            CSO components in CS.

            Proof: We first design a simplified example showing that a simple obstacle in
            WS can mapintotwo CSO components in CS. In Figure 5.35, the WS obstacle
            O produces two separate CSO components, each resulting from the interaction
            between O and each of the two vertical walls on the robot. Clearly, one can
            add additional vertical walls to the robot (and reduce the size of the obstacle if
            necessary) so that the number of CSO components will increase as well. This
            way one can create as many CSO components as one wishes.
              On the other hand, by Condition 5.8.1, a CSO component must have an interior
            point. Also, by Theorem 5.8.1, CSO is an open set, and so its any interior point
            must have a neighborhood of positive radius r that is entirely enclosed in a
            CSO component. Thus the CSO component must occupy in CS a finite volume
            (area). By Lemma 5.8.1, C has a finite volume or area; hence the number of CSO
            components in CS must be finite. Q.E.D.

              Figure 5.36a demonstrates another case of a “false contact,” more compli-
            cated than the previous one. The corresponding CSO indeed has interior points,
            Figure 5.36b. By our definition of contact, at the configuration shown the robot
            is not in contact with the obstacle because it cannot exert any force upon the





                          O
                                                O c            O c
                                           0                              l
                        Robot
                        l


                         (a)                                (b)
            Figure 5.35 Illustration for Theorem 5.8.2. A single physical obstacle, O, can produce
            more than one CSO component. (a) WS: A simple robot with one translational joint. (b)
            CS: The corresponding two separate CSO components.
   273   274   275   276   277   278   279   280   281   282   283