The 15th International Conference on Advanced Robotics
Tallinn University of Technology
Tallinn, Estonia, June 20-23, 2011
A Review of Models and Structures for Wheeled Mobile Robots:
Four Case Studies
Ramiro Velazquez and Aime Lay-Ekuakille
Abstract This paper reviews the mathematical models of
four commonly encountered designs for wheeled mobile robots
(WMR). These designs belong to two generic classes of wheeled
robot structures: differential-drive and omnimobile. First, the
two wheel differential-drive model is presented to show how
zero turning radius is achieved with only bidirectional move-
ment. Three particular designs are addressed: the popular
two-active-xed wheels and one-passive-caster wheel, a simple
belt-drive, and sprocket-chain system. Next, the model for
omnimoble robots with Swedish wheels is presented to illustrate
holonomic omnidirectional motion. All four models are based
on physical parameters easily measured and are useful to
understand the internal dynamics of these WMR and to
accurately visualize their motion in 2D environments. They
can be therefore used as a practical reference to predict the
accessibility of physical prototypes to selected places and to
test different algorithms for control, path planning, guidance,
and obstacle avoidance.
I. I NTRODUCTION
Understanding how wheeled mobile robots (WMR) move
in response to input commands is essential for feedback
control design and many navigation tasks such as path
planning, guidance, and obstacle avoidance.
Campion and Chung classied in [1] the mobility of WMR
into ve generic structures corresponding to a pair of indices
(m, s): mobility degree m and steerability degree s. The rst
one refers to the number of degrees of freedom the WMR
could have instantaneously from its current position without
steering any of its wheels while the second refers to the
number of steering wheels that can be oriented independently
in order to steer the WMR. These ve classes are:
Type (3,0) robots or omnidirectional robots have no
steering wheels (s=0) and are equipped only with
Swedish or active caster wheels. They have full mobility
in the plane (m=3), which means that they are able
to move in any direction without any reorientation.
Representative examples of such robots are [2] and [3].
Type (2,0) robots have no steering wheels (s=0) but
either one or several xed wheels with a common
axle. The common axle restricts mobility to a two-
dimensional plane (m=2). Examples of type (2,0) robots
are [4] and [5].
Type (2,1) robots have no xed wheels and at least one
steering wheel. If there is more than one steering wheel,
R. Velazquez is with the Mechatronics and Control Systems Lab
(MCS), Universidad Panamericana, 20290, Aguascalientes, Mexico. Con-
tact: rvelazquez@ags.up.mx
A. Lay-Ekuakille is with the Department of Innovation
Engineering, Universit`a del Salento, 73100, Lecce, Italy. Contact:
aime.lay.ekuakille@unisalento.it
978-1-4577-1159-6/11/$26.00 2011 IEEE
their orientations must point to the same direction (s=1).
Therefore, mobility is restricted to a two-dimensional
plane (m=2). An example is the synchronous drive
WMR in [6].
Type (1,1) robots have one or several xed wheels
on a common axle and also one or several steering
wheels, with two conditions for the steering wheels:
their centers must not be located on the common
axle of the xed wheels and their orientations must
be coordinated (s=1). Mobility is restricted to a one-
dimensional plane determined by the orientation angle
of the steering wheel (m=1). Examples of this type are
the tricycle, the bicycle, and the car-like WMR.
Type (1,2) robots have no xed wheels, but at least two
steering wheels. If there are more than two steering
wheels, then their orientation must be coordinated in
two groups (s=2). Mobility is restricted to a one-
dimensional plane (m=1) determined by the orientation
angles of the two steering wheels.
This paper particularly address type (3,0) and (2,0) robots.
Taking as example our own prototypes (and some practical
lessons learned from their implementation), we derive the
mathematical models of four commonly encountered designs
for these two types of WMR.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows: in Sec-
tion 2, the popular two wheel differential-drive model is
obtained using the general two-active-xed wheels and one-
passive-caster wheel structure. Next, two other differential-
drive designs are presented to illustrate some other efcient
locomotion systems: a simple belt-drive system which shows
how frictional forces transfer torque to generate motion and
a sprocket-chain system which offers another method for
transferring motion when frictional forces are insufcient
to transfer power. In Section 3, the omnimobile robot with
Swedish wheels is analyzed. The resulting model shows how
holonomic omnidirectional motion is achieved. Finally, the
conclusion summarizes the paper main concepts.
II. D ESIGNS AND P ROTOTYPES
Let us start addressing type (2,0) robots. There are many
design alternatives; however, the two-wheel differential-drive
robot is by far the most popular design.
Let us consider our prototype IVWAN (Fig. 1(a)). Its
mechanical structure is based on a differential-drive con-
guration consisting of two independently controlled front-
active wheels and one-rear-caster wheel (Fig. 1(b)). Active
wheels are driven by two high-power DC motors which allow
IVWAN to achieve a maximum speed of 20 km/hr.
524
 (a) (b) (c)
Fig. 1. Type (2,0) WMR IVWAN (Intelligent Vehicle With Autonomous Navigation): (a) prototype and (b) its differential-drive structure. Two front
wheels each driven by its own motor. A third wheel is placed in the rear to passively roll along while preventing the robot from falling over. The wheels
exhibit three speeds: u, u, and . (c) Free-body diagram. The rst subscript stands for front f and caster c wheel while the second subscript stands for
right r and left l wheel.

IVWAN exhibits both manual and autonomous operation: Kinematics of point G is related to u and by eq. (3):
it can be tele-operated or self-guided by a color camera
x = ucos bsin
and an array of ultrasonic sensors that allow the machine
to detect and follow visual patterns and negotiate obstacles, y = usin + bcos
respectively [7]. = (3)
Fig. 1(c) shows a schematic representation of the As aforementioned, traction wheels are powered by DC
differential-drive structure. Here, B represents the center of motors. These can be modeled by eq. (4):
the axis connecting both traction wheels; G represents the ka
vehicles center of mass and for simplicity, it is considered r = (Er kb r )
Ra
as the point to control in position (x, y) and orientation (). ka
Resultant forces and momentum in the structure can be l = (El kb l ) (4)
Ra
expressed by eq. (1):
where r and r are the torques developed by the motors
 on the right and left wheels upon input DC voltages Er
Fx = m(u u) = Ff rx + Ff lx + Fcx + FGx and El respectively, ka and kb are the motors torque and
 electromotive force constants, and Ra is the motors electric
Fy + u) = Ff ry + Ff ly + Fcy + FGy
= m(u
resistance. Inductive voltages have been neglected.
 d Equations describing the wheel-motor system can be sim-
Mz = I = (Ff rx Ff lx ) b(Ff ry + Ff ly ) +
2 ply written as shown in eq. (5):
+(c b)Fcy + G (1)
Ie r + De r = r Ff rx r
Ie l + De l = l Ff lx r (5)
where m is the vehicles total mass, I is the moment
of inertia around point G, and u, u and are the robots where Ie and De are the moment of inertia and the
linear, transverse sliding, and angular speeds, respectively coefcient of viscous friction of the wheel-motor system,
(Fig. 1(b)). Speed u can be reasonable neglected assuming respectively and r is the nominal radius of the traction wheel
that the wheels do not slip during motion. Concerning u and tires. Using and combining eqs. (1) to (5), the differential-
, they can further be dened by eq. (2): drive model can be summarized by eq. (6):

1 x ucos bsin 0 0
u = [r(r + l ) + (ur + ul )] y usin + bcos 0 0

2 Eu
1 = +0 0
= [r(r l ) + (ur ul )] a3 E (6)
d
(2) u a rr 2 2 a4 u a2r
a
0
1 1 1
2rd
2 aa23 rru aa42 d2 0 a2
where r is the traction wheel radius, d is the distance with inputs:
between the traction wheels (see Fig. 1(c)), r , and l are Er + El
the angular speeds of the right and left wheels respectively, Eu =
2
and ur and ul are the linear speeds of the right and left Er El
wheels respectively. E =
2
525
 (a) (b)

Fig. 2. (a) Block diagram reference for differential-drive robots. (b) Summary of motion upon voltages Er and El .

and constants:
Ra
a1 = (m r r + 2Ie ) [V s2 ]
ka
Ra
a2 = [Ie d2 + 2rr(I + mb2 )] [V m2 s2 ]
ka
Ra
a3 = mb [V s2 /m]
ka
Ra ka kb
a4 = ( + De ) [V s/rad]
ka Ra
Note that eq. (6) relates the robots motion to the motors
input voltages. The block diagram model for differential-
drive robots is shown in g. 2(a). This diagram identies the
electronics, DC motors, and the vehicles kinematics.
Fig. 2(b) summarizes how differential-drive robots are (a)
controlled by the input voltages Er and El . When both
voltages are equal, the two driving wheels turn at the same
angular speed and in the same direction, which causes a
translation movement. If one voltage is set to zero, one of
the wheels turns while the other remains motionless, then the
robot describes a circle centered on the motionless wheel. If
both voltages are equal in magnitude but opposite sign, the
wheels turn at the same speed but in opposite direction which (b)
causes a rotation around the center of the axis connecting Fig. 3. (a) A simulated trajectory of the differential-drive robot and (b)
both wheels (point B). Note a zero turning radius in this the corresponding driving signals.
case.
Numerical values of the parameters involved in eq. (6)
can be easily measured from an existent prototype and life. They transmit power through frictional contacts. They
the specications of the DC motors can be obtained from function best at moderate speeds (20 to 30 m/s) under static
the manufacturer. As illustrative example, consider all gain loads. Their efciencies drop slightly at low speeds and
blocks of g. 2(a) as unity gains. Fig. 3(a) shows a computer centrifugal effects limit their capacities at high speeds [8].
simulation of a certain trajectory in the XY plane. Fig. 3(b) Let us consider our prototype Enyo (Fig. 4(a)). Its mecha-
shows the driving signals supplied to the DC motors. Note nical structure is based on a four wheel differential-drive
the correspondence with g. 2(b). conguration driven by a belt system. Two active-front-
There are other design alternatives for differential-drive wheels transfer rotating motion to the two passive-rear-
robots, subsections A and B present two different approaches. wheels through belts (Fig. 4(b)). This motor-belt system
allows Enyo to achieve a maximum speed of 30 km/hr. Even
A. Belt-drive though Enyo seems a car-like type (1,1) WMR, it is a type
Belts have long been used for the transfer of mechanical (2,0) WMR because none of its wheels are steerable.
power. Todays at belts are relatively light, inexpensive, Fig. 4(c) shows a schematic representation of the belt-drive
tolerant of alignment errors, and ensure a long operating system. Here, the belt is modeled as a spring with constant

526
 (a) (b) (c)
Fig. 4. Type (2,0) WMR Enyo: (a) prototype and (b) its belt-drive system. (c) Schematic of the locomotion system.

TABLE I
k. The radii of the pulleys are r1 and r2 while their inertias
S UMMARY OF THE PARAMETERS INVOLVED IN THE BELT- DRIVE MODEL .
are J1 and J2 , respectively. As in the previous case, traction
pulleys are power by DC motors. The angular speed of the Parameter Value Unit
motor and hence, of the active pulley is m and the angular R 4
L 1 H
speed of the passive pulley is p . ke 0.99 V-s/rad
Eqs. (7) to (9) describe this system: kt 15.55 N-m/A
J 0.04 kg-m2
Li = E Ri ke m (7) r 0.11 m
J1 m = kt i bm r1 (F1 F2 ) (8) b 0.25 N-m-s/rad

J2 p = bp + r2 (F1 F2 ) (9)
where E is the input voltage to the motor, R and L are
the motors electric resistance and inductance, kt and ke
are the motors torque and electromotive force constants,
respectively. The motor-pulley friction is denoted by b while
F1 and F2 are the forces exerted by the belt on the pulleys.
These forces can be further expressed as eq. (10):
F1 = k(x1 x2 )
F2 = F1 = k(x2 x1 ) (10)
Knowing that x1 = r1 m and x2 = r2 p , and further
considering that pulleys are identical (J1 = J2 = J and
r1 = r2 = r), eqs. (8) and (9) become eqs. (11) and (12):
J m = kt i bm 2kr2 (m p ) (11)
J p = bp + 2kr2 (m p ) (12)
The motor-pulley-belt system can be summarized by state
eq. (13):
 R 1 Fig. 5. Effect of varying the spring constant k on the belt-drive system.
i L kLe 0 0 0 i L
Plots for k=10, 50, 150, 1000 N/m.
m kt b
2kr 2
0 2kr 2
0
J J J J m
m = 0 0
1 0 0 m + 0 E
p 0 0 2kr 2
J J
b 2kr 2 0 under constant rotation, belts tend to creep. Thus, these drives
p
J
p 0 0 0 1 0 p 0 must be kept under substantial tension to function properly.
(13) One possible physical implementation to increase k is the
Essentially, the goal of belt-drive systems is to transfer one shown in g. 4(b). A third pulley or V-belt pulley forces
efciently mechanical power between pulleys so that their the belt to increase it spring constant k.
angular speeds are the same (m = p ).
Using Enyos parameters given in table 1, g. 5 examines B. Sprocket and chain drive
the effect of varying the spring constant k on the pulleys Sprockets and chains offer another option for transfer-
angular speeds. Note that, the higher the values of k, the best ring rotating motion between shafts when the friction of
match between m and p . In practice, this means that, even a drive-belt is insufcient to transfer power. Contrary to

527
 (a)
Fig. 6. Type (2,0) WMR Connor: (a) prototype and (b) its sprocket and chain system. (c) Schematic of the locomotion system.
belts, sprockets and chains transmit power through bearing
forces while maintaining a xed phase relationship between
the input and output shafts. The main drawback is the
contact between the sprocket and chain: the contact can slip
signicantly as the chain rollers and sprocket teeth move in
and out [9].
Let us consider our prototype Connor (Fig. 6(a)). Its
mechanical structure is based on a sprocket and chain
differential-drive conguration. Using chains, one active-
front shaft transfers rotating motion to two passive-rear
shafts (Fig. 6(b)). This drive allows Connor to achieve a
maximum speed of 20 km/hr. Its caterpillar type structure
makes Connor a type (2,0) WMR as none of its sprockets
are steerable.
Fig. 6(c) shows a schematic representation of Connors
sprocket and chain system. As in a belt-drive, the chain can
be modeled as a spring with constant k. The radii of the
sprockets are r1 , r2 , and r3 while their inertias are J1 , J2 ,
and J3 . Angular speeds are m , p , and q , respectively.
Considering again a DC motor with constants kt and ke
as actuator, then the motor-sprocket-chain system can be
summarized by eqs. (14) to (17):
Li = E Ri ke m (14)
J1 m =
kt i bm r1 k(2r1 m r2 p r3 q )(15)
J2 p = bp + r2 k(2r2 p r3 q r1 m ) (16)
J3 q = r3 k(2r3 q r1 m r2 p ) (17)
In principle, all contact drives experience frictional losses.
The friction between all-metal drives without any lubricant
is high enough to damage the drive. On the other hand, belt-
drives have little frictional losses and the sprocket and chain
drive has none. In eqs. (15) and (16), b represents the friction
between the sprocket-chain drive and the rolling surface.
As in a belt-drive, simulation of eqs. (14) to (17) would
illustrate the speed relationships between the three sprockets
of different radii as well as the importance of having the
chain under substantial tension. Note that the third sprocket
(J3 ) is meant for this purpose.
(b) (c)
III. O MNIMOBILE WMR
Omnimobile WMR correspond to type (3,0) robots. The
main advantage of these WMR is that they exhibit holo-
nomicity, i.e. the ability to move in any direction without an
orientation change. The holonomicity and omnidirectional
properties come from the use of Swedish wheels or active
caster wheels. Conventional wheels limit WMR motion as
they exhibit 2 DOF and a no side-slip condition (see Fig.
1(b)). However, special wheels such as the Swedish actually
ensure 3 DOF.
Let us consider our prototype NG (Fig. 7(a)). Its mecha-
nical design is based on an equilateral triangle-like structure.
Three omniwheels are disposed at each one of its vertices
and are directly coupled to DC motors (Fig. 7(b)). NG
can be tele-operated via an RF point-to-point connection or
autonomously guided by an array of ultrasonic sensors. It
was conceived to participate in the 2009 Robocup middle-
size soccer league.
Fig. 7(c) shows a schematic representation of its omni-
mobile structure. Here, ve coordinate systems are dened:
SI the inertial reference system with coordinates (X,Y), Sc
the robots center of mass with coordinates (xc , yc ), and Si
at each wheel with coordinates (xi , yi ), i=1,2,3. L is the
distance between the coordinate systems SI and Si , i is
the wheel-i angle in the Sc system while is the robots
orientation angle in the SI system. The robots position in
space is then dened by posture vector I =[X Y ]T .
The relationship between the robots velocity on the SI
and Sc coordinate systems is dened by eq. (18):
I = R()1 c (18)
with:
cos() sin() 0
R() = sin() cos() 0
0 0 1
where R() is an orthogonal rotation matrix from Sc to SI .
Similarly, velocity components on Sc are function of velocity
components on the Si coordinate system. This relationship
is described by eq. (19):
528
 (a) (b) (c)
Fig. 7. Type (3,0) WMR NG: (a) prototype, (b) equilateral triangle-like structure with Swedish wheels, and (c) schematic of the robots kinematics.

xc cos(i ) sin(i ) Lsin(i ) xi
yc = sin(i ) cos(i ) Lcos(i ) yi (19)
0 0 1
Considering that 1 = 90 , 2 = 180, and 3 = 330 in
NG and applying the coordinate transformation described in
eq. (18), the robots inertial velocities can be expressed as a
function of the wheels angular velocities i (eq. (20)):

2 1 1 1 1

X 3c 3c 3s 3c + 3s 1
Y = r 2 s 1 1 1 1 c 2
3 3s + 3c 3 s 3
(20)
1
3L
1
3L
1
3L
3

where c=cos(), s=sin(), and r is the omniwheels radius.
Simulation of eq. (20) allows motion visualization of omni-
WMR like NG. As example, consider L=0.3 m, r=0.05 m.
Fig. 8 shows a set of trajectories in the XY plane. As it can
be inferred, resulting motion is a combination of the angular
velocities of the three wheels. To move the omnidirectional
robot in a straight line, the angular speeds of two wheels
have to be set equal in magnitude but opposite in sign while
the angular speed of the third wheel has to be set as zero.
To rotate the robot around any point, only one wheel has to
be actuated. To rotate it around its center of mass, all three
angular speeds have to be equal in magnitude and sign.
Note that omni-WMR offer a wide range of motion
possibilities which make them superior to differential-drive
WMR in terms of dexterity and driving capabilities [10].
IV. C ONCLUSION
This paper aimed to present simple and reliable mathe-
matical models for different designs of type (3,0) and (2,0)
WMR. It intends to be a practical reference for fast and easy
understanding of the main equations governing these WMR.
In particular, this paper addressed differential-drive and
omnimobile WMR. For the rst, the kinematics and dynam-
ics of popular congurations such as the general two-active-
xed wheels and one-passive-caster wheel, the belt-drive, and
sprocket-chain were obtained. For the second, the kinematics
of WMR with Swedish wheels was presented. All models
were illustrated using physical prototypes.
Fig. 8. Simulated trajectories for omnidirectional robot NG.
Computer simulation of these models allows motion vi-
sualization and can be therefore exploited for the design of
control algorithms, path planning, obstacle avoidance, etc.
R EFERENCES
[1] G. Campion and W. Chung, Wheeled robots, Chapter 17 in: Hand-
book of Robotics (B. Siciliano, O. Khatib, eds.), Springer, pp 391-410,
2008.
[2] L. Huang, Y. Lim, D. Li and C. Teoh, Design and analysis of a four-
wheel omnidirectional mobile robot, Proc. of International Conference
on Autonomous Robots and Agents, pp 425-428, 2004.
[3] M. Wada and S. Mori, Holonomic and omnidirectional vehicle with
conventional tires, Proc. of IEEE-ICRA, pp 3671-3676, 1996.
[4] R. Velazquez, A. Camacho and B. Romero, Modeling, design and
vision-based control of a low-cost electric power wheelchair prototype
Int. Journal of Assistive Robotics and Systems, 10(3), pp 13-24, 2009.
[5] E. Papadopoulos and M. Misailidis, On differential drive robot odo-
metry with application to path planning, Proc. of European Control
Conference, pp 5492-5499, 2007.
[6] D. Fox, W. Burgard and S. Thrun, Controlling synchro-drive robots
with the dynamic window approach to collision avoidance, Proc. of
IEEE-IROS, pp 1280-1287, 1996.
[7] J.S. Martnez, G. Moran, B. Romero, A. Camacho, D. Gutheim, J.
Varona, R. Velazquez, Multifunction all-terrain mobile robot IVWAN:
design and rst prototype, Proc. of Israeli Conf. on Robotics, 2008.
[8] N. Sclater and N. Chironis, Mechanisms and mechanical devices
sourcebook, McGraw-Hill, New York, 2001.
[9] J. Uicker, G. Pennock and J. Shigley, Theory of Machines and Mecha-
nisms, Oxford University Press, New York, 2003.
[10] H. Oliveira, A. Sousa, A. Paulo and P. Costa, Modeling and assessing
of omnidirectional robots with three and four wheels, Chapter 12 in:
Contemporary Robotics (A. Rodic ed.), InTech, pp 207-229, 2009.

529