Design of a biomimetic skin for an octopus-inspired robot — Part I: Characterising octopus skin
Source abstract
Abstract
Octopus skin samples were tested under quasi-static and scissor cutting conditions to measure the in-plane material properties and fracture toughness. Samples from all eight arms of one octopus were tested statically to investigate how properties vary from arm to arm. Another nine octopus skins were measured to study the influence of body mass on skin properties. Influence of specimen location on skin mechanical properties was also studied. Material properties of skin, i.e. the Young's modulus, ultimate stress, failure strain and fracture toughness have been plotted against the position of skin along the length of arm or body. Statistical studies were carried out to help analyzing experimental data obtained. Results of this work will be used as guidelines for the design and development of artificial skins for an octopus-inspired robot.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Cephalopods and Marine Biology · Soft Robotics and Applications · Adhesion, Friction, and Surface Interactions
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (47)
Show source-provided references
1. Octopus project, [2009], http://www.octopus-project.eu.
2. Kier W M, Stellas M P. The arrangement and function of octopus arm musculature and connective tissue. Journal of Morphology, 2007, 268, 831–843.10.1002/jmor.10548 ↗
3. Young J Z. The Anatomy of the Nervous System of Octopus Vulgaris, Clarendon Press, Oxford, UK, 1971.
4. Smith K K, Kier W M. Trunks, tongues, and tentacles: Moving with skeletons of muscle. American Scientist, 1989, 77, 28–35.
5. Gutfreund Y, Flash T, Yarom Y, Fiorito G, Segev I, Hochner B. Organization of octopus arm movements: A model system for studying the control of flexible arms. The Journal of Neuroscience, 1996, 16, 7297–7307.10.1523/JNEUROSCI.16-22-07297.1996 ↗
6. Sumbre G, Gutfreund Y, Fiorito G, Flash T, Hochner B. Control of octopus arm extension by a peripheral motor program. Science, 2001, 293, 1845–1848.10.1126/science.1060976 ↗
7. Kier W M, Smith A M. The structure and adhesive mechanism of octopus suckers. Integrative and Comparative Biology, 2002, 42, 1146–1153.10.1093/icb/42.6.1146 ↗
8. Yekutieli Y, Sumbre G, Flash T, Hochner B. How to move with no rigid skeleton? The octopus has the answers. Biologist, 2002, 49, 250–254.
9. Sumbre G, Fiorito G, Flash T, Hochner B. Neurobiology motor control of flexible octopus arms. Nature, 2005, 433, 595–596.10.1038/433595a ↗
10. Gravagne I A, Walker I D. Uniform regulation for a multi-section continuum manipulator. Proceedings of the 2002 IEEE International Conference on Robotics 8 Automation, Washington DC, USA, 2002, 1519–1524.
11. McMahan W, Jones B, Walker I, Chitrakaran V, Seshadri A, Dawson D. Robotic Manipulators Inspired by Cephalopod Limbs. Proceedings of the Inaugural CDEN Design Conference, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, 2004, 1–10.
12. Laschi C. Embodied intelligence research in Europe: The octopus project of the ICT-FET proactive initiative EM- BODYi. 2nd EU-Korea Cooperation Forum on ICT Research, Brussels, Belgium, 2008.
13. Marks P. Robot octopus will go where no sub has gone before. The New Scientist, 2009, 201, 18.
14. Madison K C. Barrier function of the skin: ‘la raison d’être’ of the epidermis. Journal of Investigative Dermatology, 2003, 121, 231–241.10.1046/j.1523-1747.2003.12359.x ↗
15. Proksch E, Brandner J M, Jensen J M. The skin: an indispensable barrier Experimental Dermatology, 2008, 17, 1063–1072.10.1111/j.1600-0625.2008.00786.x ↗
16. Hebrank M R, Hebrank J H. The mechanics of fish skin: lack of an ‘external tendon’ role in two teleosts. Biological Bulletin, 1986, 171, 236–247.10.2307/1541920 ↗
17. Szotek S, Bedzinski R, Kobielarz M, Pielka S. Investigation of mechanical properties of the skin. 22nd DANUBIA- ADRIA Symposium on Experimental Methods in Solid Mechanics, Monticelli terme/Parma, Italy, 2005.
18. Singh A, Lu Y, Chen C, Cavanaugh J M. Mechanical properties of spinal nerve roots subjected to tension at different strain rates. Journal of Biomechanics, 2006, 39, 1669–1676.10.1016/j.jbiomech.2005.04.023 ↗
19. Lim K H, Chew C M, Chen P C Y, Jeyapalina S, Ho H N, Rappel J K, Lim B H. New extensometer to measure in vivo uniaxial mechanical properties of human skin. Journal of Biomechanics, 2008, 41, 931–936.10.1016/j.jbiomech.2008.01.004 ↗
20. Fung, Y C. Biomechanics: Mechanical Properties of Living Tissues, Springer-Verlag, New York, USA, 1981.10.1007/978-1-4757-1752-5 ↗
21. Zhang M, Zheng Y P, Mak A F T. Estimating the effective Young’s modulus of soft tissues from indentation tests-nonlinear finite element analysis of effects of friction and large deformation. Medical Engineering & Physics, 1997, 6, 512–517.10.1016/S1350-4533(97)00017-9 ↗
22. Choi A P C, Zheng Y P. Estimation of Young’s modulus and Poisson’s ratio of soft tissue from indentation using two different-sized indentors: finite element analysis of the finite deformation effect. Medical and Biological Engineering & Computing, 2005, 43, 258–264.10.1007/BF02345964 ↗
23. Pailler-Mattei C, Bec S, Zahouani H. In vivo measurements of the elastic mechanical properties of human skin by indentation tests. Medical Engineering & Physics, 2008, 30, 599–606.10.1016/j.medengphy.2007.06.011 ↗
24. Hendriks F M, Brokken D, Oomensa C W J, Bader D L, Baaijens F P T. The relative contributions of different skin layers to the mechanical behavior of human skin in vivo using suction experiments. Medical Engineering & Physics, 2000, 28, 259–266.10.1016/j.medengphy.2005.07.001 ↗
25. Cook T, Alexander H, Cohen M. Experimental method for determing 2-dimentional mechanical properties of living human skin. Medical and Biological Engineering & Computing, 1977, 15, 381–390.10.1007/BF02457990 ↗
26. Khatyr F, Imberdis C, Varchon D, Lagarde J M, Gwendal Josse G. Measurement of the mechanical properties of the skin using the suction test. Skin Research and Technology, 2006, 12, 24–31.10.1111/j.0909-725X.2006.00126.x ↗
27. Lua S H, Sacksd M S, Chunga S Y, Gloeckner D C, Pruchnic R, Huard J, de Groat W C, Chancellor M B. Biaxial mechanical properties of muscle-derived cell seeded small intestinal submucosa for bladder wall reconstitution. Biomaterials, 2005, 26, 443–449.10.1016/j.biomaterials.2004.05.006 ↗
28. Waldman S D, Lee J M. Effect of sample geometry on the apparent biaxial mechanical behaviour of planar connective tissues. Biomaterials, 2005, 26, 7504–7513.10.1016/j.biomaterials.2005.05.056 ↗
29. Lanir L, Fung Y C. Two-dimensional properties of rabbit skin. 2. Experimental results. Journal of Biomechanics, 1974, 7, 171–182.10.1016/0021-9290(74)90058-X ↗
30. Lee M C, LeWinter M M, Freeman G, Shabetai R, Fung Y C. Biaxial mechanical behavior of the pericardium in normal and volume overloaded dogs. American Journal of Physiology, 1985, 249, H222–H230.10.1152/ajpcell.1985.249.5.C367 ↗
31. Wan Abas W A, Barbenel J C. Uniaxial tension test of human skin in vivo. Journal of Biomedical Engineering, 1982, 4, 65–71.10.1016/0141-5425(82)90029-2 ↗
32. Mansour J M, Davis B R, Srour M, Theberge R. A method for obtaining repeatable measurements of the tensile properties of skin at low strain. Journal of Biomechanics, 1993, 26, 211–216.10.1016/0021-9290(93)90050-O ↗
33. Fiford R J, Bilston L E. The mechanical properties of rat spinal cord in vitro. Journal of Biomechanics, 2005, 38, 1509–1515.10.1016/j.jbiomech.2004.07.009 ↗
34. Rincón L, Schatzmann L, Brunner P, Stäubli H U, Ferguson S J, Oxland T R, Nolte L P. Design and evaluation of a cryogenic soft tissue fixation device — load tolerances and thermal aspects. Journal of Biomechanics, 2001, 34, 393–397.10.1016/S0021-9290(00)00214-1 ↗
35. Sokolis D P, Kefaloyannis E M, Kouloukoussa M, Marinos E, Boudoulas H, Karayannacos P E. A structural basis for the aortic stress-strain relation in uniaxial tension. Journal of Biomechanics, 2006, 39, 1651–1662.10.1016/j.jbiomech.2005.05.003 ↗
36. Shergold O A, Fleck N A, Radford D. The uniaxial stress versus strain response of pig skin and silicone rubber at low and high strain rates. International Journal of Impact Engineering, 2006, 32, 1384–1402.10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2004.11.010 ↗
37. Darvell B W, Lee P K D, Yuen T D B, Lucas P W. A portable fracture toughness tester for biological materials. Measurement Science and Technology, 1996, 7, 954–962.10.1088/0957-0233/7/6/016 ↗
38. Lucas P W, Pereira B. Estimation of fracture toughness of leaves. Functional Ecology, 1990, 4, 819–822.10.2307/2389448 ↗
39. Choong M F, Lucas P W, Ong J S Y, Pereira B, Tan T W, Turner I M. Leaf fracture toughness and sclerophylly-their correlations and ecological implications. New Phytologist, 1992, 121, 597–610.10.1111/j.1469-8137.1992.tb01131.x ↗
40. Vincent J F V. Fracture In Biomechanics Materials-A Practical Approach. IRL Press, Oxford, 1992.10.1093/oso/9780199632237.001.0001 ↗
41. Pereira B P, Lucas P W, Swee-Hin T. Ranking the fracture toughness of thin mammalian soft tissues using the scissors cutting test. Journal of Biomechanics, 1997, 31, 91–94.10.1016/S0021-9290(96)00101-7 ↗
42. Bonser R H C, Saker L, Jeronimidis G. Toughness anisotropy in feather keratin. Journal of Materials Science, 2004, 39, 2895–2896.10.1023/B:JMSC.0000021474.75864.ff ↗
43. Atkins A G, Xu X. Slicing of soft flexible solids. International Journal of Mechanical Sciences, 2005, 47, 479–492.10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2005.01.013 ↗
44. Atkins A G. Toughness and cutting: A new way of simultaneously determining ductile fracture toughness and strength. Engineering Fracture Mechanics, 2005, 72, 849–860.10.1016/j.engfracmech.2004.07.014 ↗
45. Atkins A G. The Science and Engineering of cutting: The Mechanics and Processes of Separating and Puncturing Biomaterials, Metals and Non-Metals Elsevier, Oxford, 2009.
46. Foutz T L, Stone E A, Abrams C F. Effects of freezing on mechanical properties of rat skin. American Journal of Veterinary Research, 1992, 53, 788–792.10.2460/ajvr.1992.53.05.788 ↗
47. Snedecor G W. Statistical Methods. The Iowa State University Press, Ames, USA, 1956.