journal article·2006-12

Rolling in nature and robotics: A review

Rhodri H. Armour, Julian F. V. Vincent

Journal of Bionic Engineering· Volume 3· Issue 4
Publisher page

Abstract

Abstract This paper presents a review of recent rolling robots including Rollo from Helsinki University of Technology. Spherical Mobile Robot from the Politecnico of Bari, Sphericle from the University of Pisa, Spherobot from Michigan State University. August from Azad University of Qazvin and the University of Tehran, Deformable Robot from Ritsumeijan University. Kickbot from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Gravitational Wheeled Robot from Kinki University, Gyrover from Carnegie Mellon University, Roball from the Universite de Sherbrooke, and Rotundus from the Angstrom Space Technology Center. Seven rolling robot design principles are presented and discussed (Sprang central member. Car driven. Mobile masses. Hemispherical wheels, Gyroscopic stabilisation. Ballast mass - fixed axis, and Ballast mass - moving axis). Robots based on each of the design principles are shown and the performances of the robots are tabulated. An attempt is made to grade the design principles based on their suitability for movement over an unknown and varied but relatively smooth terrain. The result of this comparison suggests that a rolling robot based on a mobile masses principle would be best suited to this specific application. Some wonderful rolling organisms are introduced and defined as “active” or “passive” depending on whether they generate their own rolling motion or external forces cause their rolling.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Control and Dynamics of Mobile Robots · Robotic Locomotion and Control · Robotic Path Planning Algorithms

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

References (20)

Show source-provided references
1. Garcia-Paris M, Deban S M. A novel antipredator mechanism in salamanders: Rolling escape in hydromantes platycephalus. Journal of Herpetology, 1995, 29, 149–151.10.2307/1565105 ↗
2. Henschel J. Feature creature — The golden wheel spider. Gobabeb Times, 2005, 1, 3.
3. Antol J, Calhoun P, Flick J, Hajos G, Kolacinski R, Minton D, Owens R, Parker J. Low Cost Mars Surface Exploration: The Mars Tumbleweed. NASA Technical Report, NASA Langley Research Center, NASA/TM-2003-212411.
4. Antol J, Chattin R L, Copeland B M, Krizan S A. The NASA langley mars tumbleweed rover prototype. Proceeding of the 44th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, Nevada, USA, 2006, AIAA-2006-0064.10.2514/6.2006-64 ↗
5. Jakubik P, Suomela J, Vainio M, Yilkorpi T, Halme A. ARIADNA AO4532-03/6210, Biologically Inspired Solutions for Robotic Surface Mobility. Helsinki University of Technology — Automation technology laboratory, Helsinki, 2004.
6. Brackenbury J. Caterpillar kinematics. Nature, 1997, 390, 453.10.1038/37253 ↗
7. Full R, Earls K, Wong M, Caldwell R. Locomotion like a wheel? Nature, 1993, 365, 495.10.1038/365495a0 ↗
8. Caldwell R L. A unique form of locomotion in a stomatopod — backward somersaulting. Nature, 1979, 282, 71–73.10.1038/282071a0 ↗
9. Halme A, Schonberg T, Wang Y. Motion control of a spherical mobile robot. 4th IEEE Intemational Workshop on Advanced Motion Control, Mie, Japan, 1996, 1, 259–264.
10. Reina G, Foglia M, Milella A, Gentile A. Rough-terrain traversability for a cylindrical shaped mobile robot. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Mechatronics, IEEE, New York, USA, 148–153.10.1109/ICMECH.2004.1364428 ↗
11. Rover Company Limited. Ball-shaped Robot. St Petersburg Russia, 1996.
12. Bicchi A, Balluchi A, Prattichizzo D, Gorelli A. Introducing the “SPHERICLE”: An experimental testbed for research and teaching in nonholonomy. IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Albuquerque, NM, USA, 1997, 3, 2620–2625.
13. Mukherjee R, Minor M A, Pukrushpan J T. Simple motion planning strategies for spherobot: A spherical mobile robot. Proceedings of the 38th Conference on Decision and Control, Phoenix, AZ, USA, 1999, 3, 2132–2137.
14. Javadi A H A, Mojabi P. Introducing august: A novel strategy for an omnidirectional spherical rolling robot. IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Washington, DC, USA, 2002, 3527–3533.
15. Sugiyama Y, Hirai S. Crawling and jumping by a deformable robot. IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Sendal, Japan, 2004, 4, 3276–3281.
16. Batten C, Wentzlaff D. Kickbot: A Spherical Autonomous Robot. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, [2006-3-20], http://www.mit.edu/~cbatten/work/kickbot-embint01.pdf
17. Kiyoshi Ioi H I, Ayanobu Murakami. Design of a gravitational wheeled robot. Advanced Robotics, 2002, 16, 785–793.10.1163/15685530260425756 ↗
18. Brown H B Jr, Xu Y. A single-wheel, gyroscopically stabilized robot. IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Minneapolis, MN, USA, 1996, 4, 3658–3663.
19. Michaud F, Laplante J-F, Larouche H, Duquette A, Caron S, Letourneau D, Masson P. Autonomous spherical mobile robot to child development studies. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 2005, 35, 471–480.10.1109/TSMCA.2005.850596 ↗
20. Rotundus Rotundus. Durable mobile robot for outdoor serveillance. Uppsala University, Ångström Space Technology Center, 2002.