Hostname: page-component-5b777bbd6c-ks5gx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-06-20T07:07:54.319Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Analysis of the passability of four-wheeled pipeline robots and control theories for their vision components and field of view definition

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 June 2025

Jigen Fang ,
Ran Hu Open the ORCID record for Ran Hu [Opens in a new window]  and
Dongming Gan Open the ORCID record for Dongming Gan [Opens in a new window]
Jigen Fang
Affiliation:
School of Mechanical and Electrical Engineering, Anhui Jianzhu University, Hefei, China
Ran Hu
Affiliation:
School of Mechanical and Electrical Engineering, Anhui Jianzhu University, Hefei, China
Dongming Gan*
Affiliation:
School of Engineering Technology, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, 47906, USA
*
Corresponding author: Dongming Gan; Email: dgan@purdue.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Due to the complexity of urban and rural drainage systems, although many types of robots have been designed for this purpose, the mainstream pipeline inspection robots are currently dominated by four-wheeled designs. In this study, the shortcomings of four-wheeled pipeline robots were analyzed, including poor passability, difficulties in spatial positioning and orientation, and the limited effectiveness of conventional two-degree-of-freedom observation systems. Based on these issues, the spatial pose mathematical model of the four-wheeled robot inside the pipeline was investigated, along with the spatial geometric constraints and speed characteristics during cornering. This study was intended to reveal the spatial geometric parameter limitations and the kinematic characteristics of the four-wheeled pipeline robot under these constraints, providing corresponding recommendations. To address the issue of the outdated two-degree-of-freedom vision component, a three-degree-of-freedom visual component was designed, and forward kinematics analysis was conducted using Standard-Denavit-Hartenberg parametric modeling, revealing its motion speed and characteristics. Based on this visual component, a new concept of in-pipeline robot vision was proposed, providing new references for the design of four-wheeled pipeline robots.

Keywords

pipeline robotspatial positioningpassivityfreedomfield of view
Type
Research Article
Information
Robotica , First View , pp. 1 - 18
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Hussain, M., Zhang, T., Dwight, R. and Jamil, I., “Energy pipeline degradation condition assessment using predictive analytics-challenges, issues, and future directions,” J. Pipeline Sci. Eng. 4(3), 100178 (2024).10.1016/j.jpse.2024.100178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aryai, V., Baji, H. and Mahmoodian, M., “Failure assessment of corrosion affected pipeline networks with limited failure data availability,” Process Safety Environ. Prot. 157, 306–319 (2022).10.1016/j.psep.2021.11.024CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gargade, A. and Ohol, S., “Design and Development of in-Pipe Inspection Robot for Various Pipe Sizes,” IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, vol. 1012 (IOP Publishing, 2021). No. 1.10.1088/1757-899X/1012/1/012001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farhadian, A., Varfolomeev, M. A., Kudbanov, A., Rezaeisadat, M. and Nurgaliev, D. K., “Waterborne polymers as kinetic/anti-agglomerant methane hydrate and corrosion inhibitors: A new and promising strategy for flow assurance,” J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng. 77, 103235 (2020).10.1016/j.jngse.2020.103235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Song, K., Tian, M., Yao, M., Geng, X., Xu, Y., Li, Y. and Wang, W., “Experimental study on the evolution process of hydrate deposition, blockage and decomposition in reducing pipeline,” J. Taiwan Inst. Chem. Eng. 157, 105414 (2024).10.1016/j.jtice.2024.105414CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wen, J., Zhang, Y., Zhou, W., Fu, Y., Zhao, W. and Sheng, W., “Molecular mechanism of the clathrate cage formation in structure-II cyclopentane hydrate: An ab initio study,” J. Chem. Thermodyn. 143, 106063 (2020).10.1016/j.jct.2020.106063CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nayak, A. and Pradhan, S. K., “Design of a new in-pipe inspection robot,” Procedia Eng. 97, 2081–2091 (2014).10.1016/j.proeng.2014.12.451CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ab Rashid, M. Z., Yakub, M. F. M., bin Shaikh Salim, S. A. Z., Mamat, N., Syed Mohd Putra, S. M. and Roslan, S. A., “Modeling of the in-pipe inspection robot: A comprehensive review,” Ocean Eng. 203, 107206 (2020).10.1016/j.oceaneng.2020.107206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colvalkar, A., Pawar, S. S. and Patle, B. K., “In-pipe inspection robotic system for defect detection and identification using image processing,” Mater. Today Proc. 72, 1735–1742 (2023).10.1016/j.matpr.2022.09.476CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verma, A., Kaiwart, A., Dubey, N. D., Naseer, F. and Pradhan, S., “A review on various types of in-pipe inspection robot,” Materials Today: Proceedings 50, 1425–1434 (2022).Google Scholar
Zhu, Q., Guan, X., Yu, B., Zhang, J., Ba, K., Li, X., Xu, M. and Kong, X., “Overview of structure and drive for wheel-legged robots,” Robot. Auton. Syst. 181, 104777 (2024).10.1016/j.robot.2024.104777CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhao, J., Wang, J., Liu, Q., Luo, X. and Dong, X., “A review of mechanical model, structure, and prospect for long-distance pipeline pig and robot,” Robotica 40(12), 4271–4307 (2022).10.1017/S026357472200090XCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, H., Li, J., Zhang, X. and Deng, Z., “Application of Visual Servoing to an X-Ray Based Welding Inspection Robot,” 2005 International Conference on Control and Automation, vol. 2 (IEEE, 2005).Google Scholar
Tao, J., Peiwen, Q. and Zhengsu, T., “Development of Magnetic Flux Leakage Pipe Inspection Robot Using Hall Sensors,” Micro-Nanomechatronics and Human Science, 2004 and The Fourth Symposium Micro-Nanomechatronics for Information-Based Society, 2004 (IEEE, 2004).Google Scholar
Nestleroth, J. B. and Davis, R. J., “Application of eddy currents induced by permanent magnets for pipeline inspection,” NDT & E Int. 40(1), 77–84 (2007).10.1016/j.ndteint.2006.07.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Okamoto, J.Jr, Adamowski, J. C., Tsuzuki, M. S. G., Buiochi, F. and Camerini, C. S., “Autonomous system for oil pipelines inspection,” Mechatronics 9(7), 731–743 (1999).10.1016/S0957-4158(99)00031-8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herbst, J., “Non-Destructive Testing of Sewer Pipes by An Acoustical Method,” IMTC/2002. Proceedings of the 19th IEEE Instrumentation and Measurement Technology Conference (IEEE Cat. No. 00CH37276), vol. 1 (IEEE, 2002).Google Scholar
Mohamed, M. A.-H., Ramadan, M. A. and El-Dash, K. M., “Cost optimization of sewage pipelines inspection,” Ain Shams Eng. J. 14(5), 101960 (2023).10.1016/j.asej.2022.101960CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawari, A., Alamin, M., Alkadour, F., Elmasry, M. and Zayed, T., “Automated defect detection tool for closed circuit television (cctv) inspected sewer pipelines,” Autom. Constr. 89, 99–109 (2018).10.1016/j.autcon.2018.01.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahnamouei, J. T. and Moallem, M., “A comprehensive review of in-pipe robots,” Ocean Eng. 277, 114260 (2023).10.1016/j.oceaneng.2023.114260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shachaf, D., Drory, L.-H. and Zarrouk, D., “Locomotion analysis of a crawling wave robot in circular canal,” Mech. Mach. Theory 200, 105699 (2024).10.1016/j.mechmachtheory.2024.105699CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Qi, H., Zhang, X., Chen, H. and Ye, J., “Tracing and localization system for pipeline robot,” Mechatronics 19(1), 76–84 (2009).10.1016/j.mechatronics.2008.06.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
An, J., Lee, G., Oh, I., Moon, H. and Ryew, S., “Navigation-oriented design for in-pipe robot in recursively divided sampling space with rapidly exploring random tree,” J. Mech. Sci. Technol. 31(12), 5987–5995 (2017).10.1007/s12206-017-1143-8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, K. and Lien, T. K., “Structure design and kinematics of a robot manipulator,” Robotica 6(4), 299–309 (1988).10.1017/S0263574700004665CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shrey, S., Patil, S., Pawar, N., Lokhande, C., Dandage, A. and Ghorpade, R. R., “Forward kinematic analysis of 5-DOF LYNX6 robotic arm used in robot-assisted surgery,” Mater. Today Proc. 72, 858–863 (2023).10.1016/j.matpr.2022.09.080CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tung, T. T., Tinh, N. V., Thao, D. T. P. and Minh, T. V., “Development of a prototype 6 degree of freedom robot arm,” Results Eng. 18, 101049 (2023).10.1016/j.rineng.2023.101049CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alebooyeh, M. and Urbanic, R. J., “Neural network model for identifying workspace, forward and inverse kinematics of the 7-DOF YuMi 14000 ABB collaborative robot,” IFAC-PapersOnLine 52(10), 176–181 (2019).10.1016/j.ifacol.2019.10.019CrossRefGoogle Scholar