aiqbench analysis
This study evaluates the positioning accuracy of five commercial mobile robots for non-destructive evaluation in aerospace, revealing that current base localization falls short of strict industry tolerances without supplementary sensing. The findings provide a reproducible framework for selecting platforms based on their specific LiDAR SLAM or visual odometry capabilities rather than making broad feasibility claims.
A comparative study on the accuracy & repeatability of mobile robotic platforms for the delivery of precision NDE measurement
arXiv:2609.03794v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Mobile robotic platforms offer a flexible alternative to fixed manipulators for non-destructive evaluation (NDE) of large aerospace structures, but their base-positioning accuracy and how that accuracy should inform deployment have not been assessed under a common, externally referenced protocol. This work presents a laser tracker-based evaluation workflow (ground truth approximately 6 micrometers) that measures the static and segmented trajectory positioning accuracy of five commercial mobile platforms (KUKA KMP-1500, KUKA KMR, MiR250, Boston Dynamics Spot, Clearpath Husky) under a common protocol. A coupled multi-corner calibration recovers the laser-to-robot transformation and reflector offsets; ordinary least squares over all poses is used, with robust estimation retained only as a blunder check. Static positioning accuracy ranged from a median of 8.2 mm (KMP-1500) to 63.5 mm (Spot), with the wheel-odometry-only Husky uncalibratable. Dynamic path following was characterised by cross-track error; the component was insensitive to temporal alignment, which ranged from 6.9 mm (KMP-1500) to 112.1 mm (Spot). Both accuracy and calibratability tracked localisation capability, from the newest LiDAR SLAM platform to map-free visual odometry. No configuration meets the 0.2 to 1.0 mm aerospace NDE tolerance from the base alone; the results are framed as a design input that sizes the supplementary sensing each platform requires: roughly one order of magnitude for the best platform and nearly two for the worst, providing a reproducible basis for platform selection rather than a feasibility claim.
Abstract:Mobile robotic platforms offer a flexible alternative to fixed manipulators for non-destructive evaluation (NDE) of large aerospace structures, but their base-positioning accuracy and how that accuracy should inform deployment have not been assessed under a common, externally referenced protocol. This work presents a laser tracker-based evaluation workflow (ground truth approximately 6 micrometers) that measures the static and segmented trajectory positioning accuracy of five commercial mobile platforms (KUKA KMP-1500, KUKA KMR, MiR250, Boston Dynamics Spot, Clearpath Husky) under a common protocol. A coupled multi-corner calibration recovers the laser-to-robot transformation and reflector offsets; ordinary least squares over all poses is used, with robust estimation retained only as a blunder check. Static positioning accuracy ranged from a median of 8.2 mm (KMP-1500) to 63.5 mm (Spot), with the wheel-odometry-only Husky uncalibratable. Dynamic path following was characterised by cross-track error; the component was insensitive to temporal alignment, which ranged from 6.9 mm (KMP-1500) to 112.1 mm (Spot). Both accuracy and calibratability tracked localisation capability, from the newest LiDAR SLAM platform to map-free visual odometry. No configuration meets the 0.2 to 1.0 mm aerospace NDE tolerance from the base alone; the results are framed as a design input that sizes the supplementary sensing each platform requires: roughly one order of magnitude for the best platform and nearly two for the worst, providing a reproducible basis for platform selection rather than a feasibility claim.
Robotics (cs.RO)
arXiv:2609.03794 [cs.RO]
(or arXiv:2609.03794v1 [cs.RO] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.03794 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 321 words
