Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T11:25:51.839Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Planar kinematics analysis of a snake-like robot

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 November 2013

Lounis Douadi ,
Davide Spinello ,
Wail Gueaieb  and
Hassan Sarfraz
Lounis Douadi*
Affiliation:
School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, University of Ottawa, 800 King Edward Ave., Ottawa, Ontario K1N 6N5, Canada
Davide Spinello
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Ottawa, 161 Louis Pasteur, Ottawa, Ontario K1N 6N5, Canada
Wail Gueaieb
Affiliation:
School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, University of Ottawa, 800 King Edward Ave., Ottawa, Ontario K1N 6N5, Canada
Hassan Sarfraz
Affiliation:
School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, University of Ottawa, 800 King Edward Ave., Ottawa, Ontario K1N 6N5, Canada
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: Lounis.douadi@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

This paper presents the kinematics of a planar multibody vehicle which is aimed at the exploration, data collection, non-destructive testing and general autonomous navigation and operations in confined environments such as pipelines. The robot is made of several identical modules hinged by passive revolute joints. Every module is actuated with four active revolute joints and can be regarded as a parallel mechanism on a mobile platform. The proposed kinematics allows to overcome the nonholonomic kinematic constraint, which characterizes typical wheeled robots, resulting into a higher number of degrees of freedom and therefore augmented actuation inputs. Singularities in the kinematics of the modules are analytically identified. We present the dimensional synthesis of the length of the arms obtained as the solution of an optimization problem with respect to a suitable dexterity index. Simulation results illustrate a kinematic control path following inside pipes. Critical scenarios such as 135° elbows and concentric restriction are explored. Path following shows the kinematic capability of deployment of the robot for autonomous operations in pipelines, with feedback implemented by on-board sensors.

Keywords

Mobile robotsNavigationParallel manipulatorsService robotsControl of robotic systems
Type
Articles
Information
Robotica , Volume 32 , Issue 5 , August 2014 , pp. 659 - 675
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Abdelnour, K., Stinchcombe, A., Porfiri, M., Zhang, J. and Childress, S.. “Wireless powering of ionic polymer metal composites toward hovering microswimmers,” IEEE-ASME Trans. Mechatronics 17 (5), 924–935 (Oct. 2012).Google Scholar
2.Altafini, C., “A path tracking criterion for an LHD articulated vehicle,” Int. J. Robot. Res. 18 (5), 435–441 (1999).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.Altafini, C., “Some properties of the general n-trailer,” Int. J. Control 74 (4), 409–424 (2001).Google Scholar
4.Altafini, C., “Following a path of varying curvature as an output regulation problem,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Control 47 (9), 1551–1556 (2002).Google Scholar
5.Altafini, C., “Path following with reduced off-tracking for multibody wheeled vehicles,” IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol. 11 (4), 598–605 (2003).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.Barraquand, J. and Latombe, J., “Nonholonomic multibody mobile robots: Controllability and motion planning in the presence of obstacles,” Algorithmica 10 (2), 121–155 (1993).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7.Bayraktaroglu, Z. Y. and Blazevic, P., “Understanding snakelike locomotion through a novel push-point approach,” J. Dyn. Syst. Meas. Control 127 (1), 146–152 (2005).Google Scholar
8.Bernstein, D. S., Matrix Mathematics: Theory, Facts, and Formulas, 2nd ed. (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 2011).Google Scholar
9.Bolzern, P., DeSantis, R., Locatelli, A. and Togno, S., “Dynamic model of a two-trailer articulated vehicle subject to nonholonomic constraints,” Robotica 14, 445–450 (1996).Google Scholar
10.Chirikjian, G. S. and Burdick, J. W., “The kinematics of hyper-redundant robot locomotion,” IEEE Trans. Robot. Autom. 11 (6), 781–793 (Dec. 1995).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11.Colgate, J. E. and Lynch, K. M., “Mechanics and control of swimming: A review,” IEEE J. Ocean. Eng. 29 (3), 660–673 (Jul. 2004).Google Scholar
12.Corke, P. I. and Ridley, P. R., “Steering kinematics for a center-articulated mobile robot,” IEEE Trans. Robot. 17 (2), 215–218 (2001).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13.de-Wit, C. C., NDoudi-Likoho, A. D. and Micaelli, A., “Nonlinear control for a train-like vehicle,” Int. J. Robot. Res. 16 (3), 300–319 (1997).Google Scholar
14.Fjerdingen, S. A., Liljeback, P. and Transeth, A. A., “A Snake-Like Robot for Internal Inspection of Complex Pipe Structures (PIKo),” Proceedings of the 2009 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (St. Louis, MO, USA, 2009), pp. 5665–5671.Google Scholar
15.Frenet, F., “Sur les courbes à double courbure,” J. Math. pures et Appliquées 17, 437–447 (1852).Google Scholar
16.Fukushima, E. F. and Hirose, S., “Attitude and Steering Control of the Long Articulated Body Mobile Robot KORYU,” In: Climbing and Walking Robots, Towards New Applications (Zhang, H., ed.) (InTech, Croatia, 2007) Chap. 2, pp. 23–48.Google Scholar
17.Gosselin, C. and Angeles, J., “Singularity analysis of closed-loop kinematic chains,” IEEE Trans. Robot. Autom. 6 (3), 281–290 (1990).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18.Hirose, S. and Morishima, A., “Design and control of a mobile robot with an articulated body,” J. Robot. Res. 9 (2), 99–113 (1990).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19.Huang, M. Z., “Design of a planar parallel robot for optimal workspace and dexterity,” Int. J. Adv. Robot. Syst. 8 (4), 176–183 (2011).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20.Jamoussi, A., “Robotic NDE: A New Solution for In-line Pipe Inspection,” Proceedings of the 3rd Middle East Nondestructive Testing Conference and Exhibition, Bahrain, Nov. 27–30 (2005).Google Scholar
21.Kimura, H. and Hirose, S., “Development of Genbu: Active Wheel Passive Joint Articulated Mobile Robot,” In: IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (Lausanne, Switzerland, 2002), pp. 823–828.Google Scholar
22.Krishnaprasad, P. S. and Tsakiris, D. P., “G-snakes: Nonholonomic Kinematic Chains on Lie Groups,” In: Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, Vol. 3 (Lake Buena Vista, Florida, USA, 1994), pp. 2955–2960.Google Scholar
23.Lacagnina, M., Guccione, S., Muscato, G. and Sinatra, R., “Modelling and simulation of multibody mobile robot for volcanic environment explorations,” In: IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (Lausanne, Switzerland, 2002), pp. 823–828.Google Scholar
24.Liljebäck, P., Stavdahl, O. and Pettersen, K. Y., “Modular pneumatic snake robot: 3D modelling, implementation and control,” Model. Identif. Control 29 (1), 21–28 (2008).Google Scholar
25.Lizarraga, D. A., Morin, P. and Samson, C., “Chained form approximation of a driftless system. Application to the exponential stabilization of the general N-trailer system,” Int. J. Control 74 (16), 1612–1629 (Nov. 2001).Google Scholar
26.Ma, S. and Tadokoro, N., “Analysis of creeping locomotion of a snake-like robot on a slope,” Auton. Robots 20 (1), 15–23 (2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
27.Marras, S. and Porfiri, M., “Fish and robots swimming together: Attraction towards the robot demands biomimetic locomotion,” J. R. Soc. Interface 9 (73), 1856–1868 (Aug. 2012).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
28.Martinez, J. L., Morales, J., Mandow, A. and Garcia-Cerezo, A. J., “Steering limitations for a vehicle pulling passive trailers,” IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol. 16 (4), 809–818 (2008).Google Scholar
29.Merlet, J. P., Parallel Robots (Springer, New York, NY, 2006).Google Scholar
30.Mirats Tur, J. M. and Garthwaite, W., “Robotic devices for water main in-pipe inspection: A survey,” J. Field Robot. 27 (4), 491–508 (2010).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
31.Murugendran, B., Transeth, A. A. and Fjerdingen, S. A., “Modeling and Path-Following for a Snake Robot with Active Wheels,” In: Proceedings of the 2009 IEEE-RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (St. Louis, MO, USA, 2009), pp. 3643–3650.Google Scholar
32.Onal, C. D., Wood, R. J. and Rus, D., “An origami-inspired approach to worm robots,” IEEE-ASME Trans. Mechatronics 18 (2), 430–438 (Apr. 2013).Google Scholar
33.Ono, M. and Kato, S., “A study of an earthworm-type inspection robot movable in long pipes,” Int. J. Adv. Robot. Syst. 6 (1), 85–90 (2010).Google Scholar
34.Ostrowski, J. and Burdick, J., “Gait Kinematics for a Serpentine Robot,” In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Vol. 2 (Minneapolis, MN, USA, 1996), pp. 1294–1299.Google Scholar
35.Poi, G., Scarabeo, C. and Allotta, B., “Traveling wave locomotion hyper-redundant mobile robot,” In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Vol. 1 (Leuven, Belgium, 1998), pp. 418–423.Google Scholar
36.Schempf, H., Mutschler, E., Goltsberg, V., Skoptsov, G., Gavaert, A. and Vradis, G., “Explorer: Untethered Real-Time Gas Main Assessment Robot System,” Proceedings of International Workshop on Advances in Service Robotics (Bardolino, Italy, 2003).Google Scholar
37.Shin, H., Jeong, K.-M. and Kwon, J.-J., “Development of a Snake Robot Moving in a Small Diameter Pipe,” Proceedings of the International Conference on Control, Automation and Systems (Gyeonggi-do, Korea, 2010), pp. 1826–1829.Google Scholar
38.Suzumori, K., Wakimoto, S. and Takata, M., “A miniature inspection robot negotiating pipes of widely varying diameter,” In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (Taipei, Taiwan, 2003), pp. 2735–2740.Google Scholar
39.Tangorra, J. L., Davidson, S. N., Hunter, I. W., Madden, P. G. A., Lauder, G. V., Dong, H., Bozkurttas, M. and Mittal, R., “The development of a biologically inspired propulsor for unmanned underwater vehicles,” IEEE J. Ocean. Eng. 32 (3), 533–550 (Jul. 2007).Google Scholar
40.Transeth, A. A., Leine, R. I., Glocker, C. and Pettersen, K. Y., “3-D snake robot motion: Nonsmooth modeling, simulations, and experiments,” IEEE Trans. Robot. 24 (2), 361–376 (Apr. 2008).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
41.Transeth, A. A., Leine, R. I., Glocker, C., Pettersen, K. Y. and Liljebäck, P., “Snake robot obstacle-aided locomotion: Modeling, simulations, and experiments,” IEEE Trans. Robot. 24 (1), 88–104 (2008).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
42.Transeth, A. A. and Pettersen, K. Y., “Developments in Snake Robot Modeling and Locomotion,” In: 9th International Conference on Control, Automation, Robotics and Vision (ICARCV), Singapore (Dec. 5–8, 2006), pp. 1–8.Google Scholar
43.Transeth, A. A., Pettersen, K. Y. and Liljebäck, P., “A survey on snake robot modeling and locomotion,” Robotica 27 (07), 999–1015 (2009).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
44.Wiriyacharoensunthorn, P. and Laowattana, S., “Analysis and Design of a Multi-Link Mobile Robot (Serpentine),” In: IEEE International Conference on Industrial Technology, Vol. 2 (Bangkok, Thailand, 2002), pp. 694–699.Google Scholar
45.Yu, J., Ding, R., Yang, Q., Tan, M., Wang, W. and Zhang, J., “On a bio-inspired amphibious robot capable of multimodal motion,” IEEE-ASME Trans. Mechatronics 17 (5), 847–856 (Oct. 2012).Google Scholar
46.Yu, J., Su, Z., Wang, M., Tan, M. and Zhang, J., “Control of Yaw and Pitch Maneuvers of a Multilink Dolphin Robot,” IEEE Trans. Robot. 28 (2), 318–329 (Apr. 2012).Google Scholar
47.Yuan, J., Huang, Y., Kang, Y. and Liu, Z., “A Strategy of Path Following Control for Multi-Steering Tractor-Trailer Mobile Robot,” Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics (Shenyang, China, 2004), pp. 163–168.Google Scholar