Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-25wd4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T16:33:52.684Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Designing arm length of a screw drive in-pipe robot for climbing vertically positioned bent pipes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 June 2014

Atsushi Kakogawa ,
Taiki Nishimura  and
Shugen Ma
Atsushi Kakogawa
Affiliation:
Department of Robotics, Ritsumeikan University, Eastwing Building 5F, 1-1-1 Noji-Higashi, Kusatsu, Shiga, Japan
Taiki Nishimura
Affiliation:
Department of Robotics, Ritsumeikan University, Eastwing Building 5F, 1-1-1 Noji-Higashi, Kusatsu, Shiga, Japan
Shugen Ma*
Affiliation:
Department of Robotics, Ritsumeikan University, Eastwing Building 5F, 1-1-1 Noji-Higashi, Kusatsu, Shiga, Japan School of Electrical Engineering & Automation, Tianjin University, China
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: shugen@se.ritsumei.ac.jp
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

This paper presents a method for designing the arm lengths of a screw drive in-pipe robot with a pathway selection mechanism to pass through bent pipes. The robot comprises a front-rotating unit (rotator), middle-steering unit, and rear-supporting unit (stator). Each unit has elastic arms, which can be elongated by springs and can be pushed against the inner wall of the pipe. The robot can travel and steer not only in straight pipes but also in bent pipes and T-branches. When the robot passes through such pipes, its mobility depends on whether the arms can touch the inner wall because the robot will lose the driving force if one of the arms cannot reach the inner wall. This is especially important in vertically positioned pipes, where the robot will fall down if it is unable to reach. In this paper, we focus on the cross-section of the bent pipes, arm length, spring stiffness, and mass of the robot to clarify the mobility of the robot in these types of pipes. A method for determining the initial arm length on the basis of simple quasi-statics is proposed and experimental verification is conducted.

Keywords

DesignMobile robotsService robotsInspectionIn-pipe robots
Type
Articles
Information
Robotica , Volume 34 , Issue 2 , February 2016 , pp. 306 - 327
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

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.)

References

1.Tur, J. M. M. and Garthwaite, W., “Robotic devices for water main in-pipe inspection: A survey,” J. Field Robot. 27 (4), 491–508 (2010).Google Scholar
2.Reber, K., Beller, M., Willems, H. and Barbian, O. A., “A New Generation of Ultrasonic In-line Inspection Tools for Detecting, Sizing and Locating Metal Loss and Cracks in Transmission Pipelines,” In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Ultrasonics Symposium, Munich, Germany, vol. 1 (2002) pp. 665–671.Google Scholar
3.Duran, O., Althoefer, K. and Seneviratne, L. D., “State of the art in sensor technologies for sewer inspection,” IEEE Sensors J. 2 (2), 73–81 (2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Li, Y., Ma, P., Qin, C., Xu, J. and Gao, X., “A novel mobile robot for finned tubes inspection,” Robotica 21 (6), 691–695 (2003).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5.K-Rostamabad, A., Reilly, J. P., Nikolova, N. K., Hare, J. R. and Pasha, S., “Machine learning techniques for the analysis of magnetic flux leakage images in pipeline inspection,” IEEE Trans. Magn. 45 (8), 3073–3084 (2009).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.Hu, Z. and Appleton, E., “Dynamic characteristics of a novel self-drive pipeline pig,” IEEE Trans. Robot. 21 (5), 781–789 (2005).Google Scholar
7.Lim, H., Choi, J. Y., Kwon, Y. S., Jung, E-J. and Yi, B-J., “SLAM in Indoor Pipelines with 15-mm Diameter,” Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Pasadena, CA (2008), pp. 4005–4011.Google Scholar
8.Hoshina, M., Mashimo, T. and Toyama, S., “Development of Spherical Ultrasonic Motor as a Camera Actuator for Pipe Inspection Robot,” Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, St. Louis, MO (2009) pp. 2379–2384.Google Scholar
9.Ishikura, M., Wakana, K., Takeuchi, E., Konyo, M. and Tadokoro, S., “Running Performance Evaluation of Inchworm Drive and Vibration Drive for Active Scope Camera,” Proceedings of the IEEE/ASME International Conference on Advanced Intelligent Mechatronics, Budapest, Hungary (2011) pp. 599–604.Google Scholar
10.Suzumori, K., Miyagawa, T., Kimura, M. and Hasegawa, Y., “Micro inspection robot for 1-in pipes,” IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatronics 4 (3), 286–292 (1999).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11.Roh, S. and Choi, H. R., “Differential-drive in-pipe robot for moving inside urban gas pipelines,” IEEE Trans. Robot. 21 (1), 1–17 (2005).Google Scholar
12.Jun, C., Deng, Z. Q. and Jiang, S. Y., “Study of Locomotion Control Characteristics for Six Wheels Driven In-Pipe Robot,” Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics, Shenyang, China (2004) pp. 119–124.Google Scholar
13.Dertien, E., Stramigioli, S. and Pulles, K., “Development of an Inspection Robot for Small Diameter Gas Distribution Mains,” Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Shanghai, China (2011) pp. 5044–5049.Google Scholar
14.Nassiraei, A. A. F., Kawamura, Y., Ahrary, A., Mikuriya, Y. and Ishii, K., “Concept and Design of a Fully Autonomous Sewer Pipe Inspection Mobile Robot ‘KANTARO’,” Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Roma, Italy (2007) pp. 136–143.Google Scholar
15.Nishimura, T., Kakogawa, A. and Ma, S., “Pathway Selection Mechanism of a Screw Drive In-Pipe Robot in T-Branches,” Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Automation Science and Engineering, Seoul, South Korea (2012) pp. 608–613.Google Scholar
16.Kakogawa, A. and Ma, S., “Stiffness design of springs for a screw drive in-pipe robot to pass through curved pipes and vertical straight pipes,” Int. J. Adv. Robot. 26 (3/4), 253–276 (2012).CrossRefGoogle Scholar