Evaluasi Kinerja Navigasi Inspeksi Melingkar Otonom Berbasis Finite State Machine pada UAV dengan Variasi Jarak di Webots
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.59024/jisi.v4i3.2451Keywords:
Autonomous Navigation, Circular Inspection, Finite State Machine, UAV, WebotsAbstract
Autonomous aerial inspection requires reliable navigation mechanisms to execute sequential flight operations while maintaining trajectory accuracy and returning to the initial position. This study evaluates a Finite State Machine (FSM)-based autonomous circular inspection navigation system implemented in the Webots simulation environment. The proposed navigation system consists of sequential states including takeoff, forward navigation, hovering, circular inspection, return navigation, and landing. The effect of inspection distance on navigation performance was investigated using five target-radius configurations of 3, 5, 7, 10, and 15 m, with three repetitions for each configuration. Performance was evaluated based on mission completion time, altitude root mean square error (RMSE), circular trajectory radius RMSE, yaw RMSE, and return-to-home (RTH) error. The results show that increasing the inspection radius leads to longer mission completion times, ranging from 88.61 s at 3 m to 350.54 s at 15 m. In contrast, altitude RMSE, radius RMSE, and yaw RMSE generally decrease as the inspection radius increases, with the lowest values obtained at 15 m of 0.1230 m, 0.1830 m, and 0.1806 rad, respectively. The RTH error exhibits a non-monotonic response, with the lowest value of 0.1615 m obtained at a 5 m inspection radius. These results indicate that inspection distance affects different aspects of autonomous navigation performance, particularly the trade-off between mission duration and trajectory-tracking accuracy. The findings demonstrate the feasibility of FSM-based autonomous circular inspection navigation in Webots and provide a simulation-based baseline for further robustness evaluation and real-world implementation.
References
Artigas, M. I., Rodrigues, R. T., Vanderseypen, L., & Bruyninckx, H. (2024). Software patterns and data structures for the runtime coordination of robots, with a focus on real-time execution performance. Frontiers in Robotics and AI, 11, 1363041. http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2024.1363041.
Baumann, C., & Martinoli, A. (2022). Spatial microscopic modeling of collective movements in multi-robot systems: Design choices and calibration. Frontiers in Robotics and AI, 9, 961053. http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2022.961053.
Baumann, C., Perolini, J., Tourki, E., & Martinoli, A. (2024). Hybrid flock–formation control algorithms. In Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 523–536. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-51497-5_37.
Brasiel, H. C., & Lima, D. A. (2024). Swarm robotics surveillance control with Ant Cellular Automata Model in the Cerrado Biome for preserving biodiversity. Journal on Interactive Systems, 15(1), 375–387. http://dx.doi.org/10.5753/jis.2024.3796.
Cheng, C., Duan, S., He, H., Li, X., & Chen, Y. (2022). A generalized robot navigation analysis platform (RoNAP) with visual results using multiple navigation algorithms. Sensors, 22(23), 9036. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s22239036.
Collins, J., Chand, S., Vanderkop, A., & Howard, D. (2021). A review of physics simulators for robotic applications. IEEE Access, 9, 51416–51431. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3068769.
Correll, N., & Martinoli, A. (2009). Multirobot inspection of industrial machinery. IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine, 16(1), 103–112. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/MRA.2008.931633.
Emmi, L., Paredes-Madrid, L., Ribeiro, Á., Pájares, G., & Santos, P. G. de. (2013). Fleets of robots for precision agriculture: A simulation environment. Industrial Robot: The International Journal of Robotics Research and Application, 40(1), 41–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/01439911311294246.
Hejase, B., & Özgüner, Ü. (2022). Physics-based simulation and automation of a load-haul-dump operation for an articulated dump truck. Vehicles, 4(1), 167–181. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/vehicles4010011.
Hussain, R., Zielińska, T., & Hexel, R. (2019). Finite state automaton based control system for walking machines. International Journal of Advanced Robotic Systems, 16(3), 1–10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1729881419853182.
Iskandar, A., & Kovács, B. (2024). Investigating the impact of curriculum learning on reinforcement learning for improved navigational capabilities in mobile robots. Inteligencia Artificial, 27(73), 163–176. http://dx.doi.org/10.4114/intartif.vol27iss73pp163-176.
Mañas-Álvarez, F.-J., Guinaldo, M., Dormido, R., & Dormido-Canto, S. (2023). Scalability of cyber-physical systems with real and virtual robots in ROS 2. Sensors, 23(13), 6073. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s23136073.
Moreno, I. J., Ouardani, D., Chaparro-Arce, D., & Cardenas, A. (2023). Real-time hardware-in-the-loop emulation of path tracking in low-cost agricultural robots. Vehicles, 5(3), 894–913. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/vehicles5030049.
Navarro, I., Pugh, J., Martinoli, A., & Matía, F. (2009). A distributed scalable approach to formation control in multi-robot systems. In Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 203–214. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-00644-9_18.
Othman, K. M., & Rad, A. B. (2020). Sequential localizing and mapping: A navigation strategy via enhanced subsumption architecture. Sensors, 20(17), 4815. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s20174815.
Plaza, J. M., Perdices, E., García-Pérez, L., & Fernández-Conde, J. (2020). A ROS-based open tool for intelligent robotics education. Applied Sciences, 10(21), 7419. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/app10217419.
Prorok, A., Correll, N., & Martinoli, A. (2011). Multi-level spatial modeling for stochastic distributed robotic systems. The International Journal of Robotics Research, 30(5), 574–589. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0278364910399521.
Rasouli, S., Dautenhahn, K., & Nehaniv, C. L. (2024). Simulation of a bio-inspired flocking-based aggregation behaviour in swarm robotics. Biomimetics, 9(11), 668. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/biomimetics9110668.
Rossander, M., & Lideskog, H. (2023). Design and implementation of a control system for an autonomous reforestation machine using finite state machines. Forests, 14(7), 1340. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/f14071340.
Trihinas, D., Agathocleous, M., Avogian, K., & Katakis, I. (2021). FlockAI: A testing suite for ML-driven drone applications. Future Internet, 13(12), 317. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/fi13120317.
Uğurlu, H. İ., Pham, H. X., & Kayacan, E. (2022). Sim-to-real deep reinforcement learning for safe end-to-end planning of aerial robots. Robotics, 11(5), 109. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/robotics11050109.
Wang, Y., Chu, D., Li, H., & Lu, L. (2023). Formation control for connected and autonomous vehicles based on distributed consensus embedded with risk potential field. IEEE Access, 11, 45618–45631. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3273610.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 JURNAL ILMIAH TEKNIK INDUSTRI DAN INOVASI

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.








