Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T10:50:59.675Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Optimal motion control of three-sphere based low-Reynolds number swimming microrobot

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2021

Hossein Nejat Pishkenari Open the ORCID record for Hossein Nejat Pishkenari [Opens in a new window]  and
Matin Mohebalhojeh
Hossein Nejat Pishkenari*
Affiliation:
Nano-Robotics Laboratory, Mechanical Engineering Department, Sharif University of Technology, Tehran, Iran
Matin Mohebalhojeh
Affiliation:
Nano-Robotics Laboratory, Mechanical Engineering Department, Sharif University of Technology, Tehran, Iran
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Microrobots with their promising applications are attracting a lot of attention currently. A microrobot with a triangular mechanism was previously proposed by scientists to overcome the motion limitations in a low-Reynolds number flow; however, the control of this swimmer for performing desired manoeuvres has not been studied yet. Here, we have proposed some strategies for controlling its position. Considering the constraints on arm lengths, we proposed an optimal controller based on quadratic programming. The simulation results demonstrate that the proposed optimal controller can steer the microrobot along the desired trajectory as well as minimize fluctuations of the actuators length.

Keywords

MicrorobotSwimmerLow-Reynolds numberDynamic ModelingOptimal Control
Type
Research Article
Information
Robotica , Volume 40 , Issue 5 , May 2022 , pp. 1257 - 1273
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

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

Gao, J., Yan, G., He, S., Xu, F. and Wang, Z., “Design, analysis, and testing of a motor-driven capsule robot based on a sliding clamper,” Robotica, 35(3), 521–536 (2017).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelson, B. J., Kaliakatsos, I. K. and Abbott, J. J., “Microrobots for minimally invasive medicine,” Ann. Rev. Biomed. Eng. 12, 55–85 (2010).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kortschack, A., Shirinov, A., Trüper, T. and Fatikow, S., “Development of mobile versatile nano handling microrobots: design, driving principles, haptic control,” Robotica, 23(4), 419–434 (2005).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ezzat, D., Amin, S., Shedeed, H. A. and Tolba, M. F., “A new nano-robots control strategy for killing cancer cells using quorum sensing technique and directed particle swarm optimization algorithm,” Adv. Intell. Syst. Comput. 921, 218–226 (2020).Google Scholar
Jang, D., Jeong, J., Song, H. and Chung, S. K., “Targeted drug delivery technology using untethered microrobots: A review,” J. Micromechan. Microeng. 29(5), 053002 (2019).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ciuti, G., Caliò, R., Camboni, D., Neri, L., Bianchi, F., Arezzo, A., Koulaouzidis, A., Schostek, S., Stoyanov, D., Oddo, C. M., Magnani, B., Menciassi, A., Morino, M., Schurr, M. O. and Dario, P., “Frontiers of robotic endoscopic capsules: A review,” J. Micro-Bio Robot. 11, 1–18 (2016).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Medina-Sánchez, M., Schwarz, L., Meyer, A. K., Hebenstreit, F. and Schmidt, O. G., “Cellular cargo delivery: Toward assisted fertilization by sperm-carrying micromotors,” Nano Lett. 16(1), 555–561 (2015).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cicconofri, G. and DeSimone, A., “Modelling biological and bio-inspired swimming at microscopic scales: Recent results and perspectives,” Comput. Fluids, 179, 799–805 (2019).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Palagi, S. and Fischer, P., “Bioinspired microrobots,” Nat. Rev. Mater. 3, 113–124 (2018).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ning, H., Zhang, Y., Zhu, H., Ingham, A., Huang, G., Mei, Y. and Solovev, A. A., “Geometry design, principles and assembly of micromotors,” Micromachines, 9(2), 75 (2018).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Coyle, S., Majidi, C., LeDuc, P. and Hsia, K. J., “Bio-inspired soft robotics: Material selection, actuation, and design,” Extr. Mech. Lett. 22, 51–59 (2018).Google Scholar
Gong, D., Cai, J., Celi, N., Feng, L., Jiang, Y. and Zhang, D., “Bio-inspired magnetic helical microswimmers made of nickel-plated Spirulina with enhanced propulsion velocity,” J. Magnet. Magnet. Mater. 468, 148–154 (2018).Google Scholar
Liu, J., Xu, T., Guan, Y., Yan, X., Ye, C. and Wu, X., “Swimming characteristics of bioinspired helical microswimmers based on soft lotus-root fibers,” Micromachines, 8(12), 349 (2017).Google ScholarPubMed
Shum, H., “Microswimmer Propulsion by Two Steadily Rotating Helical Flagella,” Micromachines, 10(1), 65 (2019).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lushi, E., Kantsler, V. and Goldstein, R. E., “Scattering of biflagellate microswimmers from surfaces,” Physical Review E, 96, 023102 (2017).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sayyaadi, H. and Bahmanyar, S., “Development of a new mechanism to change velocity in a helical swimmer robot at low Reynolds number,” Sci. Iran. 25(5), 2616–2627 (2018).Google Scholar
Nematollahisarvestani, A. and Shamloo, A., “Dynamics of a magnetically rotated micro swimmer inspired by Paramecium metachronal wave,” Prog. Biophys. Mol. Biol. 142, 32–42 (2019).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sarvestani, N., Shamloo, A. and Ahmadian, M. T., “Modeling paramecium swimming in a capillary tube,” Sci. Iran. 23(2), 658–667 (2016).Google Scholar
Khalil, I. S. M., Magdanz, V., Sanchez, S., Schmidt, O. G. and Misra, S., “Biocompatible, accurate, and fully autonomous: A sperm-driven micro-bio-robot,” J. Micro-Bio Robot. 9, 79–86 (2014).Google Scholar
Edwards, M. R., Carlsen, R. W., Zhuang, J. and Sitti, M., “Swimming characterization of Serratia marcescens for bio-hybrid micro-robotics,” J. Micro-Bio Robot. 9, 47–60 (2014).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Purcell, E. M., “Life at low Reynolds number,” Am. J. Phys. 45, 3–11 (1977).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nasouri, B., Khot, A. and Elfring, G. J., “Elastic two-sphere swimmer in Stokes flow,” Phys. Rev. Fluids, 2(4), 043101 (2017).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Datt, C., Nasouri, B. and Elfring, G. J., “Two-sphere swimmers in viscoelastic fluids,” Phys. Rev. Fluids, 3(12), 123301 (2018).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rizvi, M. S., Farutin, A. and Misbah, C., “Three-bead steering microswimmers,” Phys. Rev. E, 97(2), 023102 (2018).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ebrahimian, M., Yekehzare, M. and Ejtehadi, M. R., “Low-Reynolds-number predator,” Phys. Rev. E, 92, 063035 (2015).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Khalesi, R., Pishkenari, H. N. and Vossoughi, G., “Independent control of multiple magnetic microrobots: Design, dynamic modelling, and control,” J. Micro-Bio Robot. 16(2), 215–224, (2020).Google Scholar
Esfandbod, A., Pishkenari, H. N. and Meghdari, A., “Dynamics and control of a novel microrobot with high maneuverability,” Robotica, 1–10 (2021).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Happel, J. and Brenner, H., “The Behavior of Fluids in Slow Motion,” In: Low Reynolds Number Hydrodynamics (Moreau, R. J., ed.) (1st edn., Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, The Hague, The Netherlands, 1983), pp. 23–57.Google Scholar
Alexander, G. P., Pooley, C. M. and Yeomans, J. M., “Hydrodynamics of linked sphere model swimmers,” J. Phys. Condens. Matt. 21(20), 204108 (2009).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tonon, D., Aronna, M. S. and Kalise, D. (eds.), Optimal Control: Novel Directions and Applications (Vol. 1, Springer, 2017).CrossRefGoogle Scholar