Advertisement

Journal of Bionic Engineering

, Volume 8, Issue 4, pp 418–428 | Cite as

A flexible fin with bio-inspired stiffness profile and geometry

  • T. SalumäeEmail author
  • M. Kruusmaa
Article

Abstract

Biological evidence suggests that fish use mostly anterior muscles for steady swimming while the caudal part of the body is passive and, acting as a carrier of energy, transfers the momentum to the surrounding water. Inspired by those findings we hypothesize that certain swimming patterns can be achieved without copying the distributed actuation mechanism of fish but rather using a single actuator at the anterior part to create the travelling wave. To test the hypothesis a pitching flexible fin made of silicone rubber and silicone foam was designed by copying the stiffness distribution profile and geometry of a rainbow trout. The kinematics of the fin was compared to that of a steadily swimming trout. Fin’s propulsive wave length and tail-beat amplitude were determined while it was actuated by a single servo motor. Results showed that the propulsive wave length and tail-beat amplitude of a steadily swimming 50 cm rainbow trout was achieved with our biomimetic fin while stimulated using certain actuation parameters (frequency 2.31 Hz and amplitude 6.6 degrees). The study concluded that fish-like swimming can be achieved by mimicking the stiffness and geometry of a rainbow trout and disregarding the details of the actuation mechanism.

Keywords

biomimetics stiffness profile fin robotics fish 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    Lauder G V, Madden P G A. Learning from fish: Kinematics and experimental hydrodynamics for roboticists. International Journal of Automation and Computing, 2006, 4, 325–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    Barrett D S. Propulsive Efficiency of a Flexible Hull Underwater Vehicle, PhD Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, USA, 1996.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    Anderson J M, Chhabra N K. Maneuvering and stability performance of a robotic tuna. Journal of Integrative and Comparative Biology, 2002, 42, 118–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    Kumph J M. Maneuvering of a Robotic Pike, MS Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, USA, 2000.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    Yu J, Tan M, Wang S, Chen E. Development of a biomimetic robotic fish and its control algorithm. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics - Part B: Cybernetics, 2004, 34, 1798–1810.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    Liu J, Dukes I, Hu H. Novel mechatronics design for a robotic fish. IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Edmonton, Canada, 2005, 2077–2082.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    Cheng J Y, Pedley T J, Altringham J D. A continuous dynamic beam model for swimming fish. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London: B, 1998, 353, 981–997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    Long J H Jr, Nipper K S. The importance of body stiffness in undulatory propulsion. American Zoologist, 1996, 36, 678–694.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    Long J H Jr, Koob T J, Irving K, Combie K, Engel V, Livingston N, Lammert A, Schumacher J. Biomimetic evolutionary analysis: Testing the adaptive value of vertebrate tail stiffness in autonomous swimming robots. Journal of Experimental Biology, 2006, 209, 4732–4746.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    Long J H Jr, Porter M E, Root R G, Liew C W. Go reconfigure: How fish cahge shape as they swim and evolve. Integrative and Comparative Biology, 2010, 50, 1120–1139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    Prempraneerach P, Hover F S, Triantafyllou M S. The effect of chordwise flexibility on the thrust and efficiency of a flapping foil. 13th International Symposium on Unmanned Untethered Submersible Technology, Durham, USA, 2003.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    McHenry M J, Pell C A, Long J H Jr. Mechanical control of swimming speed: Stiffness and axial wave form in undulating fish models. Journal of Experimental Biology, 1995, 198, 2293–2305.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    Riggs P, Bowyer A, Vincent J. Advantages of a biomimetic stiffness profile in pitching flexible fin propulsion. Journal of Bionic Engineering, 2010, 7, 113–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. [15]
    Akanyeti O, Ernits A, Fiazza C, Toming G, Kulikovskis G, Listak M, Raag R, Salumäe T, Fiorini P, Kruusmaa M. Myometry-driven compliant-body design for underwater propulsion. IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Anchorage, USA, 2010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. [16]
    Alvarado P V, Youcef-Toumi K. Performance of machines with flexible bodies designed for biomimetic locomotion in liquid environments. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Barcelona, Spain, 2005.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    Alvarado P V, Youcef-Toumi K. Design of machines with compliant bodies for biomimetic locomotion in liquid environments. Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement, and Control, 2006, 128, 3–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. [18]
    Epps B P, Alvarado P V. Swimming performance of a biomimetic compliant fish-like robot. Experiments in Fluids, 2009, 47, 927–939.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. [19]
    Blight A R. Undulatory swimming with and without waves of contraction. Nature, 1976, 264, 352–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. [20]
    Blight A R. The muscular control of vertebrate swimming movements. Biological Reviews, 1977, 52, 181–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. [21]
    Long J H Jr, Mchenry M J, Boetticher N C. Undulatory swimming: How traveling waves are produced and modulated in sunfish (Lempomis Gibbosus). Journal of Experimental Biology, 1994, 192, 129–145.Google Scholar
  22. [22]
    Long J H Jr. Stiffness and damping forces in the intervertebral joints of blue marlin (Makaira Nigricans). Journal of Experimental Biology, 1992, 162, 131–155.Google Scholar
  23. [23]
    Long J H Jr, Hale M E, McHenry M J, Westneat M W. Functions of fish skin: Flexural stiffness and steady swimming of longnose gar (Lepisosteus Osseus). Journal of Experimental Biology, 1996, 199, 2139–2151.Google Scholar
  24. [24]
    Long J H Jr. Muscles, elastic energy and the dynamics of body stiffness in swimming eels. American Zoologist, 1998, 38, 771–792.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. [25]
    Alvarado P V. Design of Biomimetic Compliant Devices for Locomotion in Liquid Environments, PhD Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, USA, 2007.Google Scholar
  26. [26]
    ISO 37:2005 Rubber, vulcanized or thermoplastic - Determination of tensile stress-strain properties, 2008.Google Scholar
  27. [27]
    Webb P W, Kostecki P T, Stevens E D. The effect of size and swimming speed on locomotor kinematics of rainbow trout. Journal of Experimental Biology, 1984, 109, 77–95.Google Scholar
  28. [28]
    Meirovitch L. Fundamentals of Vibrations, McGraw-Hill international edition, McGraw-Hill Higher Education, Singapore, 2001.Google Scholar
  29. [29]
    Liao J C, Beal D N, Lauder G V, Triantafyllou M S. The Karman gait: Novel body kinematics of rainbow trout swimming in a vortex street. Journal of Experimental Biology, 2003, 206, 1059–1073.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Jilin University 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre for BioroboticsTallinn University of TechnologyTallinnEstonia

Personalised recommendations