Skip to main content
Log in

Kinematic Comparison of Forward and Backward Swimming and Maneuvering in a Self-Propelled Sub-Carangiform Robotic Fish

  • Published:
Journal of Bionic Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We make a thorough kinematic comparison of forward and backward swimming and maneuvering on a self-propelled robot platform that uses sub-carangiform swimming as the primary propulsor. An improved Central Pattern Generator (CPG) model allowing free adjustment of phase relationship and directional bias is employed to achieve flexible swimming and smooth transition. Considering the characteristics of forward swimming in carangiform fish and backward swimming in anguilliform fish, various backward swimming patterns for the sub-carangiform robotic fish are suitably created by reversing the direction of propagating propulsive waves. Through a combined use of the CPG control and closed-loop swimming direction control strategy, flexible and precise turning maneuvers in both forward and backward swimming are implemented and compared. By contrast with forward swimming, backward swimming requires a higher frequency or an increased lateral displacement to reach the same relative swimming speed. Noticeably, the phase difference shows a greater impact on forward swimming than on backward swimming. Our observations also indicate that the robotic fish achieves a larger turning rate in forward maneuvering than in backward maneuvering, yet these two maneuvers display comparable turning precision.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bandyopadhyay P R. Trends in biorobotic autonomous undersea vehicles. IEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering, 2005, 30, 109–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Bandyopadhyay P R, Beal D N, Menozzi A. Biorobotic insights into how animals swim. The Journal of Experimental Biology, 2008, 211, 206–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Tan X. Autonomous robotic fish as mobile sensor platforms: challenges and potential solutions. Marine Technology Society Journal, 2011, 45, 31–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Yan Q, Han Z, Zhang S, Yang J. Parametric research of experiments on a carangiform robotic fish. Journal of Bionic Engineering, 2008, 5, 95–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Liang J, Wang T, Wen L. Development of a two-joint robotic fish for real-world exploration. Journal of Field Robotics, 2011, 28, 70–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Liu J, Hu H. Biological inspiration: from carangiform fish to multi-joint robotic fish. Journal of Bionic Engineering, 2010, 7, 35–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Nguyen P L, Do V P, Lee B R. Dynamic modeling of a non-uniform flexible tail for a robotic fish. Journal of Bionic Engineering, 2013, 10, 201–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Sfakiotakis M, Lane D M, Davies J B C. Review of fish swimming modes for aquatic locomotion. IEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering, 1999, 24, 237–252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Islam S S, Zelenin P V. Modifications of locomotor pattern underlying escape behavior in the lamprey. Journal of Neurophysiology, 2008, 99, 297–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Herrel A, Choi H, Schepper N D, Aerts P, Adriaens D. Kinematics of swimming in two burrowing anguilliform fishes. Zoology, 2011, 114, 78–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Niu X, Xu J, Ren Q, Wang Q. Locomotion generation and motion library design for an anguilliform robotic fish. Journal of Bionic Engineering, 2013, 10, 251–264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Zhou C, Cao Z, Hou Z, Wang S, Tan M. Backward swimming gaits for a carangiform robotic fish. Neural Computing and Applications, 2013, 23, 2015–2021.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Zelenin P. Reticulospinal neurons controlling forward and backward swimming in the lamprey. Journal of Neurophysiology, 2011, 105, 1361–1371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Ijspeert A J. Central pattern generators for locomotion control in animals and robots: a review. Neural Networks, 2008, 21, 642–653.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Ajallooeian M, Ahmadabadi M N, Araabi B N, Moradi H. Design, implementation and analysis of an alternation-based Central Pattern Generator for multidimensional trajectory generation. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 2012, 60, 182–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Wu X, Ma S. Adaptive creeping locomotion of a CPG-controlled snake-like robot to environment change. Autonomous Robots, 2010, 28, 283–294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Zhou C, Low K H. Design and locomotion control of a biomimetic underwater vehicle with fin propulsion. IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics, 2012, 17, 25–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Yu J, Wang M, Tan M, Zhang J. Three-dimensional swimming. IEEE Robotics and Automation Magazine, 2011, 18, 47–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Yu J, Wang L, Tan M. Geometric optimization of relative link lengths for biomimetic robotic fish. IEEE Transactions on Robotics, 2007, 23, 382–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Guertin P A. The mammalian central pattern generator for locomotion. Brain Research Reviews, 2009, 62, 45–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Buchli J, Ijspeert A J. Distributed central pattern generator model for robotics application based on phase sensitivity analysis. Biologically Inspired Approaches to Advanced Information Technology, 2004, 3141, 333–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Kane T. The use of Kane’s dynamical equations in robotics. International Journal of Robotics Research, 1983, 2, 3–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Wu Z, Yu J, Tan M. CPG parameter search for a biomimetic robotic fish based on particle swarm optimization. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics, Guangzhou, China, 2012, 563–568.

    Google Scholar 

  24. D’AoUT K, Aerts P. A kinematic comparison of forward and backward swimming in the eel anguilla anguilla. The Journal of Experimental Biology, 1999, 202, 1511–1521.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Silver R, Boahen K, Grillner S, Kopell N, Olsen K L. Neu-rotech for neuroscience: Unifying concepts, organizing, principles, and emerging tools. The Journal of Neuroscience, 2007, 27, 11807–11819.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Long J H Jr, Shepherd W, Root R G. Maneuverability and reversible propulsion: How eel-like fish swim forward and backward using traveling body waves. Proceedings of 10th International Symposium Unmanned Untethered Submersible Technology (UUST), Specification Session Bio-Engineering, NH, USA, 1997, 118–134.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Su Z, Yu J, Tan M, Zhang J. Implementing flexible and fast turning maneuvers of a multijoint robotic fish. IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics, 2013, 99, 1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Conte J, Modarres-Sadeghi Y, Watts M N, Hover F S, Triantafyllou M S. A fast-starting mechanical fish that accelerates at 40 m⋆s−2. Bioinspiration & Biomimetics, 2010, 5, 035004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Tytell E D. The hydrodynamics of eel swimming II. Effect of swimming speed. The Journal of Experimental Biology, 2004, 207, 3265–3279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Junzhi Yu.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wu, Z., Yu, J., Tan, M. et al. Kinematic Comparison of Forward and Backward Swimming and Maneuvering in a Self-Propelled Sub-Carangiform Robotic Fish. J Bionic Eng 11, 199–212 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/S1672-6529(14)60037-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1672-6529(14)60037-8

Keywords

Navigation