Next Article in Journal
Improved Terminal Integral Sliding Mode Adaptive Disturbance Rejection Control Method for UAV SPMSM
Next Article in Special Issue
A Novel Parallel Exoskeleton for Wrist Rehabilitation: Conceptual Design, Kinematics, and Singularity Analysis
Previous Article in Journal
Numerical Study on Raceway Wear of Angular Contact Ball Bearings Considering Curvature Radius Variation
Previous Article in Special Issue
Quantitative Investigation into Friction-Induced Vibration During Mold-Opening Transience in Ultra-High-Tonnage Two-Platen Injection Molding Machines with Massive Inertia and Constraint-Guided Sliding
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Evaluating Simulation Platforms for Modular Mobile Robotic Systems

by
Andrei Baneasa
1,2,*,
Debora-Gabriela Buleandra
1,2,
Ivas Catalin-Dorin
1,2 and
Mihai Olimpiu Tatar
1,2,*
1
Department of Mechatronics and Machine Dynamics, Faculty of Automotive, Mechatronics and Mechanical Engineering, Technical University of Cluj-Napoca, 400641 Cluj-Napoca, Romania
2
European University of Technology, European Union
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Machines 2026, 14(6), 666; https://doi.org/10.3390/machines14060666
Submission received: 30 April 2026 / Revised: 31 May 2026 / Accepted: 6 June 2026 / Published: 8 June 2026
(This article belongs to the Special Issue New Advances in Science of Mechanisms and Machines)

Abstract

Modular Mobile Robotic Systems (MMRSs) require simulation tools capable of supporting distributed control architectures, dynamic reconfiguration, and scalable experimentation. This work evaluates three complementary simulation strategies for a homogeneous MMRS composed of autonomous Two-Wheel Inverted Pendulum (TWIP) modules: (i) Webots, selected for rapid prototyping through its integrated GUI; (ii) Pinocchio, paired with the Jiminy simulator to enable modern rigid-body dynamics and control-oriented modeling; and (iii) PyBullet, chosen for programmatic flexibility and reinforcement learning (RL) compatibility. A minimal and controlled benchmark scenario was implemented across all platforms to isolate core simulation characteristics: two differentially driven robots were coupled using the most appropriate mechanism available in each environment and simulated for 1000 steps in headless mode while monitoring CPU usage, memory consumption, and execution time. In addition, a feature-based analysis focused on MMRS-relevant requirements, including dynamic reconfiguration, multi-agent scalability, and suitability for RL workflows.
Keywords: modular robotics; simulation; robotics; Mechatronics modular robotics; simulation; robotics; Mechatronics

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Baneasa, A.; Buleandra, D.-G.; Catalin-Dorin, I.; Tatar, M.O. Evaluating Simulation Platforms for Modular Mobile Robotic Systems. Machines 2026, 14, 666. https://doi.org/10.3390/machines14060666

AMA Style

Baneasa A, Buleandra D-G, Catalin-Dorin I, Tatar MO. Evaluating Simulation Platforms for Modular Mobile Robotic Systems. Machines. 2026; 14(6):666. https://doi.org/10.3390/machines14060666

Chicago/Turabian Style

Baneasa, Andrei, Debora-Gabriela Buleandra, Ivas Catalin-Dorin, and Mihai Olimpiu Tatar. 2026. "Evaluating Simulation Platforms for Modular Mobile Robotic Systems" Machines 14, no. 6: 666. https://doi.org/10.3390/machines14060666

APA Style

Baneasa, A., Buleandra, D.-G., Catalin-Dorin, I., & Tatar, M. O. (2026). Evaluating Simulation Platforms for Modular Mobile Robotic Systems. Machines, 14(6), 666. https://doi.org/10.3390/machines14060666

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop