Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0.23
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Jupiter: Publikasi Ilmu Keteknikan Industri, Teknik Elektro dan Informatika
Devan Junesco V
Universitas Global Jakarta
Aerospace Engineering Automotive Engineering Chemical Engineering, Chemistry & Bioengineering Civil Engineering, Building, Construction & Architecture Computer Science & IT Control & Systems Engineering

Published : 1 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 1 Documents
Search

 1 
Evaluasi Eksperimental Navigasi Slam dan Line Follower pada Automated Guided Vehicle untuk Meningkatkan Fleksibilitas Operasional Industri Rio Handoko; Ariep Jaenul; Brainvendra Widi Dionova; Sinka Wilyanti; Arisa Olivia Putri; Devan Junesco V
Jupiter: Publikasi Ilmu Keteknikan Industri, Teknik Elektro dan Informatika Vol. 4 No. 5 (2026): September : Jupiter: Publikasi Ilmu Keteknikan Industri, Teknik Elektro dan Inf
Publisher : Asosiasi Riset Ilmu Teknik Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.61132/jupiter.v4i5.1588

Abstract

Automated Guided Vehicles (AGVs) using line-follower navigation perform effectively on fixed routes, but their flexibility is limited when routes change or obstacles block the path. This study experimentally evaluated the performance of Simultaneous Localization and Mapping (SLAM) and line-follower navigation and examined the contribution of SLAM to AGV operational flexibility. Both navigation systems were tested on the same AGV platform under four scenarios: speed variation, obstacles, payload variation, and route reconfiguration. The evaluated parameters included endpoint position error, travel time, task completion, and route reconfiguration time. User perceptions were also evaluated involving 16 personnel with experience in AGV operation or observation. The results showed that the line follower was faster and more accurate under static conditions. At speeds of 0.188 and 0.377 m/s, its mean position errors were 1.06 and 2.25 cm, respectively, compared with 8.42 and 8.49 cm for SLAM. In contrast, SLAM completed all scenarios involving 1–10 obstacles, whereas the line follower failed to complete the task when its physical path was blocked. The strongest advantage of SLAM was observed in route reconfiguration, requiring an average of 35 s compared with 286 s for the line follower, representing an 87.8% reduction. User evaluation yielded a composite score of 4.44 out of 5 with a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.863. These findings indicate a clear trade-off between navigation efficiency and operational flexibility. Line-follower navigation remains advantageous for fixed and repetitive routes, whereas SLAM provides greater value in industrial environments requiring frequent route changes and adaptive obstacle handling.
Co-Authors Ariep Jaenul Arisa Olivia Putri Brainvendra Widi Dionova Rio Handoko Sinka Wilyanti