2014 8th Asia Modelling Symposium
Mathematical Modelling and 3D Simulation of a Virtual Robotic Fish
Ammar Ibrahem Majeed
Electrical Engineering Department
University of Basrah
Basrah, Iraq
e-mail: ammar_19722@yahoo.com
Abstract- In this paper, a detailed mathematical model for a
virtual robotic fish is presented including hydrodynamic forces
and environmental conditions such as oceanic currents. Sony
HandyCam camera is used to monitor a live carp fish. The useful
monitoring data is extracted from the monitoring images that are
used to analyse the locomotion of the fish and determine specific
control variables during swimming. The locomotion control and
autonomous navigation of the proposed virtual robotic fish is
simulated in 3D using Matlab program. Experimental results
show that the simulator provides a realistic and convenient way
to develop autonomous navigation algorithms for the virtual
robotic fish. A course of experimental results show that the
control scheme was very effective in path planning and
trajectory tracking problems.
Keywords: Biomimetic; Mathematical modeling; 3D Simulation.
I. INTRODUCTION
With over 32.000 species and a billion years of evolution
fish has migrated into almost every aquatic habitat in the
world and displayed amazing adaption for locomotion even in
the most hostile environments, both as predator and prey [1].
The mechanical systems in fish formed by evolution and
natural selection are highly efficient. The main characteristic
for aquatic animals is their use of oscillating fins to propel
themselves. These highly flexible and manoeuvrable fins of
various types enable them to move from place to place [2].
The tuna is known for its speed, the pike for its
accelerations and the eel for its way of threading everywhere.
A carp can make half-turn in one half-second. To imitate all
these behaviours with robotized systems is a real challenge
and requires to better known biomechanics of the stroke and
the hydrodynamic characteristics of fish. In order to do so the
fish swimming movements should be monitored and then
analysed in order to derive the most accurate mathematical
model which leads to select the sufficient number of links and
joints for the artificial propulsive tail to mimic these
swimming movements.
These robot-fish could (or are already) be used in fields like
the oceanographical observation, leaks detection on pipelines,
underwater optical cables inspection, the search for mines,
military applications, underwater archaeological exploration.
There are many researches which try to include/understand
and reproduce the abilities of fish with robotized systems.
The RoboTuna project started in 1993 at MIT in USA with
the objective to develop a better system of propulsion for the
autonomous underwater vehicles. After RoboTuna, another
robotic fish is designed at MIT: RoboPike, the robot pike (the
pike interests the researchers for its fulgurating accelerations).
RoboPike is not maintained in the aquarium by a system of
pulley like its predecessor and can swim freely. But it is not
978-1-4799-6487-1/14 $31.00 © 2014 IEEE
DOI 10.1109/AMS.2014.31
Abduladhem Abdulkareem Ali, SMIEEE
Computer Engineering Department
University of Basrah
Basrah, Iraq
e-mail: abduladem1@yahoo.com
autonomous: its navigation is directed by human and it is the
computer which interprets the orders and returns the signals
appropriate to each engine. The NMRI (National Maritime
Research Institute) developed many projects of robotic fish
(series PF and series PPF) with a view to apply, in the future,
the capacities of fish to our boats and submarines. The PPF-04
is a small robotic fish of 19 cm and 400 g, remote controlled.
Its size makes it possible to test it in a small tank (like a bath-
tub). Essex Robotic Fish, designed by Jindong Liu and
Huosheng Hu at the Dept. of Computer Science in University
of Essex, G.B. Their goal was to carry out a robot-fish which
can swim like a real fish and which is autonomous. Engineers
at the University of Kitakyushu have developed one of the
most realistic biomimetic robots in the world. They designed a
red snapper robotic fish known as “Tai-robot-kun”. Tai-robot-
kun weighs 7kg and mimics a real fish swimming silently in
the water, and can go for as long as an hour with a full battery.
Fish, in general, swim one of two ways; thrust is either
generated by periodic movement of some portion of the
creature’s main body, or by any of a number of mechanisms
involving the creature’s median and pectoral fins [3]. The
former method of propulsion, termed body and caudal fin
(BCF) locomotion, is utilized by an estimated 85% of fish
families and will be the focus of this paper because of its use
by fast and efficient swimming fish species. Median and
paired fins (MPF) swimming is favoured by species that swim
slowly and are required to be highly manoeuvrable. There are
four modes of swimming that fall under the method of body
and caudal fin locomotion, see fig. 1; Anguilliform – whole
body undulation, Subcarangiform – undulations confined to
final half of body, Carangiform – undulations confined to final
third of body, and Thunniform – undulations confined to the
caudal fin and peduncle only [4].
Fig. 1. Gradation of swimming modes from (A) anguilliform, through (B)
subcarangiform, and (C) carangiform, to (D) thunniform.[5]
Scientists have identified two primary phenomena at work
during fish swimming that are responsible for propulsive
thrust [6]. The first is an added-mass effect whereby the fish
body imparts momentum to the water directed backward and
an equal opposing force is exerted on the fish propelling it
forward. The second is a vorticity effect whereby the vortices
110
in the fish body’s own wake impart a propulsive force, as the
vortices in the fish’s wake have a rotation and effect opposite
that of a classical drag inducing Karman vortex street [3].
Added-mass effects are associated primarily with anguilliform
swimming, while vorticity effects are associated primarily
with thunniform swimming; subcarangiform and carangiform
swimming utilize both phenomena.

II. MATHEMATICAL MODELLING OF VIRTUAL ROBOTIC FISH
The mathematical model of the Virtual robotic fish consists
of three main parts; the modelling of the tail propulsion
system, the fish dynamics, and the fish kinematics.
The modelling of the tail propulsion system describes how
the actuation system used within the tail in order to generate a
motion of the caudal fin. The dynamics section allows for the
calculation of how the forces and moments generated by the
mechanical tail causes the robotic fish to move with reference
to the body-fixed frame. The fish kinematics section describes
how the body-fixed fish velocities generated by the dynamics
section translate to an inertial fixed reference frame. Once the
model differential equations have been developed they are put
into state space form and a multi-rate simulation is
constructed using the MATLAB environment.
This paper is organized as follows; firstly a brief overview
of the state space modelling technique is given followed by a
description of the reference frames and model variables used.
Each section of the model is then presented in turn starting
with the robotic fish dynamics, followed by the modelling of
the propulsion system section which discusses the different
tail actuation schemes investigated and finally the robotic
kinematics are discussed.
A. Model Variables and Reference Frames
When working with any vehicular system such as
underwater robots, marine vessels, aircraft, spacecraft or
automobiles it is convenient to define a number of standard
variables for describing velocity, displacement, etc. and also
to define reference frames or coordinate systems. For this
model two reference frames are used, the Body-Fixed frame
Fig. 2. Illustration of Body-Fixed and Earth-Fixed reference frames
It is therefore usually necessary to translate the forces and
velocities generated in the moving body fixed frame to forces
and velocities in the Earth-fixed frame which is stationary
relative to the body-fixed frame. This translation process is
described in the vehicle kinematics section which follows
after this section.
As well as defining reference frames for the model it is
convenient to define a number of variables which describe the
motion of the vehicle within each of these reference frames. A
standard notation has been developed for use with marine
vessels by the Society of Naval Architects and Marine
Engineers (SNAME) for describing the various forces and
moments in each of the six degrees of freedom (DOF) [7].
This notation is shown in Table 1.
TABLE I
SNAME NOTATION FOR MARINE VESSELS
For the purposes of developing mathematical models these
variables are usually presented in vector form as shown in the
following equations [8]:
[]T, where [x y z]T and 
 (1)
and an inertial Earth-Fixed frame. The Body-Fixed frame is
attached to the vehicle (in our case the robotic fish) and moves


]T , where
[u v w]T and
 [p q r]T (2)
with the vehicle as it moves. For simplicity the Body-Fixed
frame usually has its origin located at the vehicles centre of []T , where  [X Y Z]T and [K M N]T(3)
gravity. The Earth-Fixed frame is assumed to be an inertial Where, is the vector of linear and angular positions within
frame, i.e. it is fixed and does not move. Fig. 2 shows a the Earth-Fixed reference frame,
is the vector of linear and
diagram with the notation used for the Body-Fixed and Earth- angular velocities within the Body-Fixed frame and is the
Fixed reference frames. The velocities and accelerations vector of forces and moments in the Body-Fixed frame. This
generated by the dynamics section of the model are calculated notation shall be used throughout the remainder of this paper.
with respect to the body-fixed reference frame. In most cases
it is useful, particularly for navigation purposes, to know how B. Robot Fish Kinematics
the vehicle is moving in the Earth fixed reference frame. To translate the body-fixed velocities generated by the
dynamics section of the model to velocities in the inertially
fixed Earth frame a transformation is required. The
transformation is made up of a series of rotations carried out
in a specific order as outlined by Euler’s Theorem on Rotation.
In order to carry out this transformation the linear and angular
velocities are dealt with separately, therefore the velocity

111
vector υ is split into two separate vectors υ1 and υ2 which are
the linear and angular velocities in the body-fixed frame as
shown previously in Equation (2). The corresponding vectors
of linear and angular positions in the Earth-Fixed reference
frame are given the notation and respectively also
shown previously in equation (1).
The standard notation for this transformation is shown in
equation (4) for the linear velocities and in equation (5) for the
angular velocities.
(4)
(5)
Where and are the linear and angular velocities in the
Earth-fixed frame respectively and J1 and J2 are the
transformation matrices used; J1 for the linear velocities
shown in equation (6) and J2 for the angular velocities shown
in equation (7) [9].
(6)
(7)
Here for compactness c represents the cosine function, s
represents the sine function and t represents tan. Therefore,
the complete kinematic equation for translating from
velocities in the body fixed frame to velocities in the Earth
frame is given in equation (8) below.
(8)
C. Robotic Fish Dynamics
The dynamic model of the biomimetic robotic fish vehicle
draws on techniques used to model conventional marine
vessels such as AUVs and ROVs. These techniques are
modified with addition or replacement of terms to represent
the biomimetic nature of the prototype such as the thrust and
drag equations for fish propulsion and the shape of the vehicle
altered to resemble a fish. The standard vehicular model for a
6 DOF system is used for modelling this system and is shown
in equation (9) [8]. This equation has the origin of the body
fixed frame located at the center of gravity of the vehicle
(robotic fish).
(9)
Where M is the inertia matrix (including added mass), C(υ) is
the matrix of Coriolis and centripetal terms (including added
mass), D(υ) is the damping matrix, g(η) is the vector of
gravitational forces and moments, τ is the vector of control
inputs and υ is the linear and angular velocity vector. How
each of these terms is dealt with in relation to the modelling of
the robotic fish vehicle is covered within the following
sections.
D. Rigid Body Dynamics
For the purposes of modelling the dynamics of the system,
the robotic fish vehicle is assumed to be a rigid body. This
112
assumption implies that the vehicle mass does not alter with
time and that the shape remains constant. The development of
the rigid body equations of motion is based on the Newton-
Euler Formulation which is based on Newton’s Second Law
which relates the acceleration and mass of an object to the
force acting on it. Mathematically, this is represented as:
ΣFm a (10)
Where m is the mass of the object in kg, a is the acceleration
of the object in ms-2 and ΣF is the summation of all the forces
acting on the body in Newtons. To develop the rigid body
equations of motion Euler’s first and second axioms are used.
These axioms express Newton’s Second Law in terms of both
linear momentum pC and angular momentum hC shown in
equations (11) and (12) [8].
Euler’s 1st Axiom (11)
Euler’s 2nd Axiom (12)
Here fC and mC are forces and moments referred to the body’s
centre of gravity, ω is the angular velocity vector, m is the
mass of the body and IC is the Inertia about the body’s centre
of gravity. The derivation of rigid body equations of motion
from Newton’s Second Law and Euler’s first and second
Axioms can be found in [8] and [9]. The rigid body equations
of motion for each of the 6 degrees of freedom for the Robotic
fish vehicle can be stated as shown in equations (13) to (18)
[8].
Surge (13)
Sway (14)
Heave (15)
Roll (16)
Pitch (17)
Yaw (18)
Here Ix, Iy and Iz are the moments of inertia of the robotic
fish about the Xb, Yb and Zb axes respectively.
E. Inertia Matrix
The inertia matrix M is composed of two components as
shown in equation (19), the rigid body inertia matrix and the
added inertia matrix to take effects due to the added mass
forces and inertia into account [8]:
M = MRB + MA (19)
To simplify the matrices it is assumed that the centre of
gravity is located at the same position as the origin of the
body-fixed frame. To give the robotic fish a degree of
metastability the centre of buoyancy is set to coincide with the
centre of gravity in the Xb and Yb axes but is set slightly
above the centre of gravity. This means that:
(20)
(21)
 A large number of marine vessel models assume that the
vehicle to be modelled is neutrally buoyant; the weight is
equal to the buoyancy force. In reality achieving neutral
buoyancy is a near impossible task without dynamic ballast
system. The rigid body inertia matrix for the robotic fish
simplifies to [8]:
form. The hull of the robotic fish vehicle is also assumed to be
prolate ellipsoid in shape, shown in fig. 3, and due to both
these assumptions the added mass matrix can be simplified to
only the diagonal elements as shown in equation (26).

(22)

Fig. 3. Prolate Ellipsoid with semi-axes a, b and c.

The moments of inertia for the robotic fish are calculated
using the standard equation for the moment of inertia of a
prolate ellipsoid for simplicity.
(26)
F. Coriolis & Centripetal Terms
For modelling purposes the effect of the Coriolis and
centripetal forces acting on the robotic fish, are dealt with
together within one matrix C(ν). The centripetal force is These assumptions also lead to the added mass terms for
caused when the motion of the robotic fish follows a curved the Coriolis and centripetal terms being simplified as shown in
path. The C(ν) matrix provides the correction required to equation (27).
model these additional movements within the model. Like the
inertia matrix, the Coriolis and centripetal matrix is made up (27)
of two components; the Coriolis and centripetal terms due to
the rigid body, CRB(ν), and the terms relating to the added
mass effect, CA(ν) [8].
Using a prolate ellipsoid as the shape for the hull the model
C( ) CRB ( )CA ( ) (23) only has to consider six added mass derivative terms which
Here CRB(ν) can be represented as shown in equation (24), can be calculated as shown in equations (28) to (32) [8].
assuming that the origin of the body fixed reference frame
coincides with the centre of gravity. (28)

(29)
(24)
(30)

The actual effects of the added mass terms shown
previously in equations (23) and (19) and the calculation of
the appropriate terms are covered in the next section.
G. Hydrodynamic Added Mass Terms
The added mass is a representation of the pressure induced
forces and moments due to a forced harmonic motion of the
body that are proportional to the acceleration of the body. This
phenomenon manifests itself mathematically within the mass
and Coriolis matrices. The standard added inertia matrix MA
containing the added mass derivatives is shown as [8]:
(25)
(31)
(32)
Here e is the eccentricity and 0 and  0 are constants.
H. Restoring Forces and Moments
The restoring forces and moments are the terms which take
into account the gravitational and buoyancy forces. Two
important parameters in calculating these forces and moments
for underwater vehicles are the distance between the origin of
the body-fixed reference frame, the centre of gravity (COG)
and the centre of buoyancy (COB) of the vehicle. In many
underwater vehicle models for simplicity the vehicle is
assumed to be neutrally buoyant. The complete vector of
restoring forces and moments due to gravitational and
buoyancy terms are shown in equation (33) [8].

In order to simplify the model, assumptions can be made

that simplify the matrix shown in equation (25). The two
(33)
assumptions made are that firstly the motion of an underwater
vehicle is usually low speed, non-linear and non-coupled and
secondly that there are certain symmetries within the hull

113
 Where W=mg and B=ρgV are the robot weight and
buoyancy forces respectively, V is the robot volume. One
important aspect to consider in all marine vehicle design is the
stability in roll. It is possible with correct positioning of the
COG and COB to create a roll restoring moment which acts
when the vehicle is subject an angular roll displacement
taking it away from its upright position. For the robotic fish it
is assumed that the COB is higher than the COG on the z-axis,
but has equal x and y-axis terms. This produces moments
which act to bring the robotic fish back to its equilibrium after
the removal of any external forces as illustrated in fig. 4 [10].
Fig. 4. Restoring forces for roll around x-axis (a) when upright i.e. no roll
angular displacement and (b) with angular roll displacement, with COB and
COG differ on z-axis.
Many conventional underwater vehicles utilize this
approach for passive roll control as no actuators are required.
Although the aim of this project is to mimic a fish as
accurately as possible, making the vehicle statically unstable
would create a number of difficult problems with the design
and control of the vehicle. Therefore, it has been decided to
choose for simplicity and make the COG below the COB.
The gravitational and buoyancy vector used for the
simulation of the robotic fish vehicle is given in equation (34).
(34)
I. Hydrodynamic Damping Terms
One force that acts on any vehicle operating in the
underwater environment is hydrodynamic damping or drag.
Damping is approximated using the standard equation for drag
shown in equation (35) [11].
(35)
Where ρ is the density of fluid (kgm-3), CD is the drag
coefficient, A is the cross-sectional area (m2) and U is the
velocity of the vehicle (ms-1). This equation is used to
calculate the drag force acting in surge, sway and heave and
also used to estimate the rotational drag terms in roll, pitch
and yaw. The equation for drag requires the drag coefficient
CD to be known in each degree of freedom. As the body of the
robotic fish is not just a prolate ellipsoid but an ellipsoid with
fins, the drag due to these fins has to be taken into account
when calculating the overall drag coefficient in each DOF.
Firstly, for the main body in surge, sway and yaw directions
the drag force can be estimated using the equation (36) for the
114
drag coefficient for simple streamlined ellipsoidal bodies at
sub-critical Reynolds Numbers [12],
(36)
Where a is radius of ellipsoid along x-axis and b is the
radius of ellipsoid along y-z plane.
J. Propulsion System Modelling
The purpose of modelling the propulsion system is to allow
for estimation of the control forces and moments (i.e. thrust
and manoeuvring forces) to be made using the input
commands to the system. These approximations of thrust are
then feed into the dynamic section of the model. For
modelling purposes, the propulsive system has been
subdivided into three sections as shown in fig. 5.
Servo Angle and Servo Arm Lateral Displacement
Frequency Displacement and Fin Angle
Servo Motor Tail Thrust
Model Kinematics Estimation
Fig. 5. Flowchart of Tail Drive Propulsion System Model
The input to the model is the desired tail beat frequency and
amplitude which is passed to the servo motor model as servo
frequency and arm angle. The output of each servo motor is
the displacement of the servo's arm. These arms displacements
are fed into the tail kinematics which rotates the tail links at
specified angular positions at each joint in the tail. Knowing
the angular position at each joint allows the caudal fin tip
displacement to be calculated along with the angle the caudal
fin makes with the tail centre line. With these caudal fin
parameters known over time it is possible to estimate the
thrust produced.
From the literature surveyed there appears to be two main
methods for estimating this thrust force: Vortex theory [13]
and Elongated Body theory and its derivatives [14]. Both
methods have their advantages and disadvantages. The vortex
method estimates the thrust produced by analysing the
vortices left in the wake as the fish swims. At present there
does not appear to be a simple method of predicting the
formation of the vortices and vortex parameters from the
movements of the fish without the use of complex
computational fluid dynamics methods, or direct observation
and measurement of the vortices produced while swimming
[15]. The other method that can be used to estimate the thrust
produced by fish like propulsion is Lighthill’s Large
Amplitude Elongated Body Theory [14]. The idea behind this
theory is the transfer of momentum between fish and water
and assumes that the majority of this transfer happens at the
caudal fin [15]. In this method both heave and pitch are
assumed to be sinusoidal functions [16] and from observations
of real fish and simulations the heave and pitch are
approximately 90o out of phase from one another. The
equation used for the thrust estimate is given in equation (37).
(37)
 Where FThrust is the surge thrust force (N), mv is the virtual
mass per unit length (kg), w is the perpendicular velocity of
tail (ms-1) and W is the lateral velocity of the tail tip (ms-1).
K. Current Effects
Control of robotic fish cannot neglect the effects of specific
disturbances such as waves, wind and ocean current. In this
(a) (b)
paper wind and waves phenomena will not be discussed since
the attention is focused to autonomous robotic fish performing
a motion or manipulation task in an underwater environment.
However, if this task has to be achieved in very shallow
waters, those effects cannot be neglected.
The effect of a small current has to be considered also in
structured environments such as a pool. In this case, the
refresh of the water is strong enough to affect the vehicle (c) (d)
dynamics [17].
The ocean current, expressed in the inertial frame, was
assumed constant and irrotational, i.e.,

(38)
(e)
Fig. 7. The animation frames of virtual robotic fish swimming at tail
frequency of 1Hz and undulation angle of 42º.
and ; its effects can be added to the dynamic of a
rigid body moving in a fluid simply considering the relative Fig. 8 shows a 3D Matlab simulation of a virtual robotic
velocity in body-fixed frame [9]; fish. The swimming is started with undulation frequency of 1
Hz and undulation angle of 42º. The simulation here was
(39) conducted at zero ocean current velocity.
in the derivation of the Coriolis and centripetal terms and the
damping terms.

III. VIRTUAL ROBOTIC FISH MATLAB SIMULATION

Fig. 6 shows the GUI of a Matlab program that simulates a
3D swimming of the virtual robotic fish. The program enables
the user to adjust the length of each tail link in addition to
adjusting the body and nose lengths to simulate any fish Fig. 8. The fish swimming simulation in Matlab for virtual robotic fish at tail
frequency of 1Hz and undulation angle of 42º with zero ocean current
species type. It is clear from the figure the simulated robotic
velocity.
fish has four links, with a virtual servo at each joint. The
vertical dashed blue lines represent the positions of these Fig. 9 below represent the same simulation as above in fig.
servos. The user can set the amplitude and frequency of 8 but with 0.3m/s ocean current velocity toward y-axis as
swimming and then by pressing the animate button the given in equation (40);
simulation starts.
m/s (40)

It is clear from fig. 9 that the fish was drifted toward the
positive y-axis due to the current in that direction.

Fig. 6. Simulation of virtual robotic fish with Matlab.

Fig. 7 shows the top view animation of fish swimming at

tail frequency of 1Hz and undulation angle (the angle between Fig. 9. The fish swimming simulation in Matlab for virtual robotic fish at tail
the body center line and the tail tip maximum amplitude) of frequency of 1Hz and undulation angle of 42º with 0.3m/s ocean current
42º, the figure shows five selected frames of this motion. velocity toward positive y-axis direction.

115
 IV. SIMULATION RESULTS
The virtual robotic fish models are converted into state
space form and simulated in the MATLAB environment. The
robotic fish models have been evaluated through a number of
simulations; trajectory test, forward propulsion, turning circle
and zig-zag maneuver.
A. Trajectory Test Fig. 17. Fish angular velocities as a function of time.
In order to demonstrate the effects discussed in this paper,
the simplest task to be considered is one involving successive
changes of the fish orientation in presence of ocean current.
The simulation length (450s) can be divided in different
period of 60s duration. The simulation was started firstly by
putting the fish in water at the position, p(t = 0) = [0 0 1 0 0
0]T [m/deg] without knowledge of the current but with an
estimation of the restoring parameters. The first 60s are used Fig. 18. Fish position errors as a function of time.
to adapt the effect of the current, see fig 14, where the desired
position is constant. In the successive period the fish is
required to move in roll and pitch from 0 deg to 10 deg and -
15 deg, respectively and come back to the original
configuration and then reverse the roll and pitch angles and
then return back to the original configuration. In the
successive two periods the vehicle is required to move of 90
Fig. 19. . Fish attitude errors in term of Euler angles as a function of time.
deg in yaw and come back to the initial position. Finally, 60s
of steady state are given. The desired and actual orientations
are shown in fig. 15. Figures 16 and 17, shows the linear and
angular velocities of the fish during the simulation period. It is
clear from fig. 16 the effect of the water current that drift the
fish in the positive y-axis direction. This current effect was
balanced by the fish swimming velocity in the reverse
direction. Figures 18 and 19, shows the position and attitude
Fig. 20. Fish forces along x, y and z body axes as a function of time.
angles errors. The position error, in fig. 18, was minimized to
zero especially in the y-axis direction where the effect of the
water current is exists.

Fig. 21. Fish moments around x, y and z body axes as a function of time.

B. Forward Propulsion
Fig. 14. Fish position as a function of time. The desired position is constant. Shown in fig. 22 is the simulation result for forward
propulsion at the average speed for carp fish which is 0.35
m/s. This is accomplished at a tail beat frequency of 1Hz and
undulation angle of 42º.

Fig. 15. Fish attitude in term of Euler angles as a function of time.

Fig. 16. Fish linear velocity as a function of time. Fig. 22. Simulated average surge velocity for robotic fish.

116
C. Turning Circle
Shown in fig. 23 is the top view for x-y plan of simulated
turning circle for a virtual robotic fish. The fish trajectory was
started at point (x=0, y=0, z=-1).
Fig. 23. Simulated turning circle for robotic fish.
Fig. 24 shows how the yawing moment acts to turn the
robotic fish to achieve the turning in a circle and in a zig-zag
maneuver.
Fig. 24. The yawing moment acts to turn the robotic fish to achieve the zig-
zag maneuver.
D. Zig-Zag Manoeuver
Shown in fig. 25 is the simulated response to a zig-zag
maneuver. The zig-zag maneuver is generated by setting the
tail centerline undulation angle to its maximum value until a
yaw angle of 20 degrees is reached. Once 20 degree yaw angle
is reached the tail centerline undulation angle is reversed to its
maximum value until a -20 degree yaw angle is reached.
Fig. 25. 20º - 20º Zig-Zag maneuver for virtual robotic fish.
V. CONCLUSION
This paper has presented a mathematical model of a
biomimetic virtual robotic fish which utilizes a four links plus
tail fin as a propulsion system. Development of the model is
described. The development of the models provides a
117
framework that allows for different types of actuation schemes
for biomimetic propulsion systems to be evaluated. Simulation
of turning circle and of zig-zag maneuver indicate that the
propulsive system may provide improved maneuverability
with a smaller steady turning radius and less overshoot during
course changes. For these reasons and the other potential
benefits of biomimetic propulsion systems discussed earlier,
use of a fish-like propulsion system may be preferred in
certain applications. The development of these detailed
mathematical models provides a framework for evaluating the
performance of different types of actuation systems for
biomimetic propulsion systems. The Matlab simulation
environment was designed and used to simulate any fish type
species as it provides the ability to adjust the fish dimensions
to get any fish body shape.
REFERENCES
[1] S. Asgeirsson, “Motion Analysis of Arctic char and Atlantic salmon”,
M. Sc. thesis, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, School of
Engineering and Natural Sciences, University of Iceland, pp 19-26,
2013.
[2] M. J. LIGHTHILL, “Aquatic animal propulsion of high
hydromechanical efficiency”, J. Fluid Mech., vol. 44, part 2, pp. 265-
301, 1970.
[3] M. Sfakiotakis et al., “Review of fish swimming modes for aquatic
locomotion,” IEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering, vol. 24, no. 2, pp.
237-252, April 1999.
[4] J.E. Colgate and K.M. Lynch, “Control problems solved by a fish’s
body and brain: a review”, in IEEE Journal of Ocean Engineering, vol.
29, no. 3, pp. 660-673, July 2004.
[5] W. S. Hoar, “Fish Physiology; Locomotion”, ACADEMIC PRESS,
INC., Volume VII, pp. 8-46, 1978.
[6] S. Kamadulski, “Optimization of Biomimetic Propulsion in a Fish Like
Robot”, M. Sc. Thesis, University of Illinois, pp. 2-5, 2012.
[7] T.I. Fossen, “Marine Control Systems”, Marine Cybernetics, pp. 9-77,
2002.
[8] T.I. Fossen, “Guidance and Control of Ocean Vehicles”, John Wiley &
Sons Ltd, pp. 5-47, 1994.
[9] G. Antonelli, “Underwater Robots; Motion and Force Control of
Vehicle-Manipulator Systems”, Second edition, Springer, pp. 15-32,
2006.
[10] C. M. Watts, “Comparison Study of Biologically Inspired Propulsion
Systems for an Autonomous Underwater Vehicle”, PhD thesis,
University of Glasgow, pp. 28-63, 2009.
[11] K. H. Low, C. W. Chong, Chunlin Zhou, and Gerald G. L. Seet, “An
Improved Semi-Empirical Model for a Body and/or Caudal Fin (BCF)
Fish Robot”, IEEE International Conference on Robotics and
Automation, pp. 78-83, 2010.
[12] A. Tonello, “Control and Guidance Systems for the Navigation of a
Biomimetic Autonomous Underwater Vehicle”, M. Sc. Thesis, Padova
University, pp. 35-36, 2011.
[13] K. Streitlien, and G. S. Triantafyllou, “On Thrust Estimates for
Flapping Foils”, Journal of Fluids and Structures, Vol. 12, pp. 47-55,
1998.
[14] M. J. Lighthill, “Large-amplitude elongated-body theory of fish
locomotion”, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Vol. 179,
pp. 125-138, 1971.
[15] J. J. Videler, “Fish Swimming: Fish and Fisheries Series 10”, London,
Chapman & Hall, pp. 8-24, 1993.
[16] M. S. Triantafyllou, A.H. Techet and F. S. Hover, “Review of
Experimental Work in Biomimetic Foils”, IEEE Journal of Oceanic
Engineering, Vol. 29 (3), pp. 585-594, 2004.
[17] G. Antonelli, S. Chiaverini, N. Sarkar and M. West, “Singularity-free
Adaptive Control for Underwater Vehicles in 6 DOF”, Experimental
Results on ODIN. In: IEEE International Symposium on
Computational Intelligence in Robotics and Automation, Monterey,
California, pp. 64–69, 1999.