Snake locomotion by anisotropic friction

Harry Yu, Kegan Woodhouse, Edgar Sigala

ABSTRACT

Although millions of years of evolution and natural selection have led to limbs of all
shapes and sizes that allow the animals of the natural kingdom to achieve incredible feats, some
animals have evolved to the point where their limbs are vestigial. Namely, snakes. Snakes have
reversed an entire spectrum of evolution to rid their form of any limbs, yet they move efficiently,
and powerfully on land and in water and are a fearsome predator in the animal kingdom. The
quality of anisotropic friction on the microscopic level was determined to be the leading
influence in limbless locomotion. Small micro fibrils, triangular in shape, can be observed by
microscope, on the ventral scales of snakes These scales are organized and oriented in a way that
higher coefficients of friction are achieved in one direction of movement than the opposite
direction. The demonstration intended for the Zoos’s educational purposes features a scaled-up
cross section of the California Mountain King snake’s ventral scales Friction. Friction tests of the
scales yielded frictional coefficients that were significantly less in the direction of forward
movement than the opposite direction, successfully demonstrating anisotropic friction.

INTRODUCTION
Snakes move efficiently without the use of limbs for propulsion. Instead, their
locomotion heavily relies on the anisotropic friction of their ventral scale. To increase efficiency
in locomotion, the surface of the snake skin must have low friction in the forward for efficiency
and at the same time, high friction in the other direction for acceleration in limbless-locomotion.
The snake’s ventral scales must provide anisotropic friction.
Based on Abdel-Aal’s research, the friction of snake scales is mostly based on the v-
shaped hair-like microstructures called fibrils [1]. These basic building blocks are arranged in
arrays that have an orientation to them that is unique to the species specific movement (i.e.
sindwinding, undulating etc.) of the snake, achieved by remarkable control of each scale’s angle
and attitude independently. To minimize the abrasion for long lasting frictional properties, the
snake's scales are much smoother on the bottom than anywhere else and in some cases can
release a lubricant for reducing forward friction.
While this is a highly specialized model of friction based movement, humans must
exploit friction efficiently for a variety of applications. For dangerous conditions such as ice and
rain, vehicle tread and footwear need high quality frictional properties [2]. We hypothesized that
similar applications pertain to friction dependent sports such as skiing and mountain biking.
The need for people to apply artificial traction for better performance in extreme
circumstances have led to some preliminary trials and applications of the snake skin’s
anisotropic friction. Collaborators in Colombia tested a surface inspired by Abdel-Aal’s
tribological study of the Royal Python skin and applied it on prosthetic hip joints [1].
Researchers in the U.K. developed a snake-inspired insert to maximize friction while minimizing
residual heat when dry machining titanium [1]. MIT engineers were also developing a
surface mimicking the geometry of a snake skin and Kirigami (Japanese paper-cutting art) to
increase friction in the bottom of shoes [2].

DESIGN
Conceptualization
To begin the design process, a table of engineering characteristics and customer
requirements was assembled and ranked by importance for the design. See Table I. In the rows,
customer requirements are listed. These are based on the assumption that this is a demonstration
used for Zoo guest audiences, mostly young children. In the columns, engineering qualities are
discretized and cross checked against the customer requirements. Based on the frequency of
cross checked characteristics the rankings were established. The design will emphasize
simplicity and robustness for ease of use and understanding.
Next, a framework for the design was organized emphasizing the traits that were rated the
highest in the engineering requirements. Table II describes the main features of the
demonstration, performance targets, environment and audience identification, budget goals, a
qualitative and quantitative breakdown, and the skills necessary for use and understanding.
Our customer requirements prioritize the characteristic of anisotropic friction. It also
prioritizes simplicity of design such that the behavior of snake skin is mimicked and the process
by which snakes achieve this quality is demonstrated to an audience with elementary
understanding of physical and biological concepts. Our design will be scaled up appropriately so
that the microstructure design of snake skin is visible yet the effectiveness of these features is
retained. The interface surface will also be scaled up in roughness to accommodate this. The
effectiveness of the design (measured by the forward and backward friction coefficient) must
remain comparable to the effectiveness of a snake to satisfy the requirement of mimicking
anisotropic friction. As long as structures are scaled up appropriately, tests (by measuring slip
angle) should yield a comparable ratio between forward and backward friction coefficient (2-6)
times greater for backward [5].
To conclude the conceptualization process a mind map was drafted with thorough
exploration of design parameters. The mind map in figure 4 explores many possible ideas, not all
of which were incorporated in the final design. In terms of manufacturing techniques, most
specialized parts were to be 3D printed and parts that were common household or hardware
products were to be purchased via the campus gateway. Finally sketches were drafted to
visualize the design characteristics. See figure 5. Again, while some features remained very
similar, many things were excluded in the final design due to time constraints.

Description
 The design chosen mimics the microscale features of the underside of a snake. The main
feature of the surface geometry of a snake that will be displayed are the ventral scales or “micro
hairs.” The anisotropic friction is caused more by the geometric or structural property rather than
the material property so our process focused on accurately scaling up these dimensions. A
detailed comparative study conducted by [2] shows that compared to other structures, the snake-
inspired microstructured surface (SIMPS) generates anisotropic friction while simultaneously
decreasing the effect of stick-slip behavior, which effectively causes a reduction in drag [6]. The
effect of anisotropic friction is linearly related with the step height of the micro-fibrils. As
observed in figure 6, frictional coefficients for upward steps increase with the step height, while
the friction coefficients for downward steps and on terraces scatter around a low value and are
nearly independent of the step height [3].
The design will be a rectangular platform of less than a few square feet that is covered
with a material that mimics the surface the California Mountain King snake traverses. The
interactive block, which sits on the platform, will display the scaled up snake skin on the bottom
and it will have a handle for ease of use. To provide the proper normal force for friction, this
interactive block must have sufficient weight (~15 oz.). This platform will hinge at its midpoint
so that it can be angled forwards and backwards at different slope angles.
The demonstration will show that at a minimal forward tilt the weighted scales will
overcome static friction and slip forwards however, at backwards tilt the scales will be static for
much longer. A rough sketch of this design can be seen in figure 5 and the final assembly can be
observed in figure 7.

Explanation
The goal of the demo is to depict how snakes can move so efficiently without limbs. The
purpose of the visual tilt is to demonstrate that snake scales can move in one direction but not the
other. The tilt platform that rocks forward and backwards visually aids the audience in
understanding how snakes can accelerate themselves by their scales by providing a qualitative
analogy to the friction coefficient: the tilt angle. In addition, the audience can more easily
visualize how the snakes accomplish this feat by the scaled up features on the model.

QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS
Unfortunately due to the experimental nature of friction science. It is difficult to predict
the effectiveness of our demonstration. However, when we have a prototype built we can
measure the angle of slip and do a simple free body diagram knowing the weight of the object to
determine the friction coefficient which will be the tangent function of the angle. We can
compare these results to friction coefficients that have been gathered in scientific literature such
as in Table III.
Table III lists coefficients of kinetic friction but we will be measuring static friction
which we can expect to be higher due to the physical meaning of static and kinetic friction.
However, the important information gathered from Table III is that we should expect higher
friction in the reverse direction . More specifically, we can compare our experimental values to
scientific literature that states that the ratio between reverse and forward friction coefficients is
between two and six [5]. Based on the data in Table III and the statistics in [5] we expect that
the coefficient of friction will be higher than 0.17 in forwards angels and two to six times this
amount in reverse angles. Based on these values we can extrapolate that the forward slip angle
should be greater than 9.6 degrees and the backwards slip angle should be between 18. 8 degrees
and 45.6 degrees. If our predictions hold, anisotropic friction will be mimicked successfully and
the effect will be qualitatively observable by the audience.

Forward Tilt Backward Tilt

Data for Kinetic Expected result 2-6 times Expected result

Friction for Static kinetic friction for Static

Friction Coefficient 0.173 > 0.173 0.346-1.038 > 0.346

Slip Angle 9.8° > 9.8° 18.8°-54.6° > 18.8°

Table 1. Quantitative Expectations based on Data for Kinetic Friction Coefficients and Ratio Factor 2:6

While the effectiveness of our design depends on unpredictable variables, evidence of the
effectiveness of this design can be extrapolated from similar attempts in product engineering
such as the snake scale like tread on nordic skis as seen in figure 8. We could not find data on the
exact coefficients of friction of these designs due to the wide variety of snow conditions that
exist. In addition scales such as these exploit a semicircular shape but research in [5] indicates
that triangular and trapezoidal geometry is more effective. Seeing as snakes display a triangular
shape, our design has implemented that approach.
The snake skin surface was modeled in Solidworks and printed on an Objet30 Pro.
Triangular geometry was chosen for similarity with the microscopic images in figure 9. The
relevant dimensions that were modeled were the width, length and prominence of the scales
which from an average of data on scale dimensions were tabulated below. The length of a scale
was chosen to be 25 mm which yielded strong results for mimicking anisotropic friction in
snakes in [5]. Figure 10 shows the final CAD design of the scales with the modulus for
nonpermanent attachment to the interactive handle and block.

Actual Model

Length 5.5 um 25mm

Width 1.56 um 7.09mm

Prominence 240 nm 1.09 mm

Table 2. Dimensional Analysis of the scale (scale: 4550:1)
RESULTS AND PERFORMANCE
 Control [degree] Forward [degree] Backward [degree]

Trial 1 33.412 38.375 82.699

Trial 2 31.285 38.621 82.699

Trial 3 31.708 38.264 82.699

Trial 4 31.363 37.972 82.699

Trial 5 31.149 36.638 82.699

Average Angle 31.7834 37.974 82.699

Friction Coefficient 0.619625 0.780555 7.80514

Table 3. Results of Testing with Angles and Frictional Coefficients

A friction test was conducted in the following way. Five trials were conducted for
control, forward tilt and backwards tilt. The experiment was recorded and the slip angle was
measured in Fiji. By a freebody diagram it is derived that the static friction coefficient ( μ ₛ ) is
equal to the tangent function of the slip angle (θ ₛ).

μ ₛ=tan(θ ₛ) (1)

The results of the demo displayed that the control test, which used the foam base of the
sanding block only, reached an average angle of 31.78 degrees and had a frictional coefficient of
0.62 . This control test can be interpreted as the basis of what normally would happen with no
assistance of the scales. The same test was conducted now with the scales on the mass. First the
scales on the block were facing forward and then tested again with the scales facing backwards.
When tested facing forward the angle at which the mass slipped was an average of 37.97 degrees
which yielded a coefficient friction of 0.78. This is very similar to the control results. We can
assume that the difference in materials of the scales and the sanding block may have had some
effect on this disparity. It is also noteworthy to consider how these values would have changed
with a lubricant such as the wax lubricant that some snakes secrete on their ventral scales. The
fact that the forward facing trials were comparable to the control made sense due to the scales of
the snake not wanting to have high friction when moving forward.
The backwards facing slip angle was averaged to be 82.70 degrees and a coefficient of
7.81. The unusually high angle and frictional coefficient was due to the surface of the platform
being felt which has such a high roughness. The microstructure of the felt and the design of the
model scales resulted in interaction that was similar to velcro which explains how the frictional
coefficient is ten times larger compared to the natural two to six difference in snakes.
 While the frictional coefficients were higher than the expected frictional coefficients, the
same trends were displayed accurately. The static friction was higher than the kinetic friction
data as in Table III. The reverse angle friction coefficient was significantly higher than the
forward angle coefficient. The conclusion is that the natural geometry and orientation of snake
ventral scales does in fact significantly contribute to the anisotropic properties of snake skin.

CONCLUSION
Snakes are the true masters of friction as they have evolved to move efficiently and
effectively over all types of surfaces. Although snakes achieve limbless locomotion due to a
variety movement techniques, macrostructures and microstructures, our project in partnership
with the Santa Barbara Zoo aimed to describe, mimic and demonstrate the anisotropic properties
of the California Mountain King snake’s ventral scales.
Motivation for this project came from the incredible ability of snake motion and
theoretical applications for this behavior in a variety of facets such as Nordic skiing, Vehicle
locomotion and no-slip footwear. It was subsequently corroborated that this is an active area of
research such as in [6] and [8]. In addition techniques for adding scales to ski bottoms for
anisotropic friction have been implemented widely for a long time, although inspiration for this
design was not necessarily derivative of studies on snakes.
The goal was to mimic the anisotropic friction of snakes in a scaled up model such that
the micro features and effects of such features were visible. In the design criteria phase it was
determined that simplicity and robustness must be emphasized due to the young audience.
Subsequent brainstorming led to a design form factor of an adjustable angled platform and an
interactive weight with the scale surface attached to the bottom. The design intent was to
qualitatively depict anisotropic friction as a clear disparity between the angles of slip in forward
and reverse motion.
The design was assembled as follows. A CAD model of the ventral scales of the
California Mountain Kingsnake was designed with a 4550 to one ratio. The CAD model was
printed and fastened non-permanently to the underside of a GoldBlatt drywall sanding block due
to the ease-of-use of the sanding block handle and convenient footprint. The tilt platform was
modified from a Medical bedside table. A small section of the scale design was printed to test
interface materials and through qualitative analysis, felt was determined to be an effective
interface material due to the high roughness factor. The felt was fastened to the table top and
backstops were added to prevent the block from flying off the table.
The effects of friction were tested in control (no scales), forward facing scales, and
backwards facing scales. The angles of slip were measured in Fiji and the coefficients of friction
were evaluated by a free body diagram. The model is a success in that the property of anisotropic
friction is clearly demonstrated, however, the results yielded 10 times higher friction coefficient
in reverse direction than in forwards motion which exceeds the expected 2-6 by a significant
amount. This is likely due to the hair like properties of felt acting like velcro with the scales.
It has been observed by this experiment that the natural design of snake scales is an
impressive demonstration of anisotropic friction and simple designs such as this one may have
applications in vehicle locomotion as well as friction dependendent sports such as skiing. In
addition, future research endeavors could explore mimicry of the ability of some snakes to
secrete a wax lubricant to enhance locomotive efficiency.
 APPENDIX I: FIGURES AND TABLES

Fig 4. Mind map of design characteristics based on user needs and engineering parameters. Broken down into two
main components: Tilt platform and interactive weight. Some characteristics were not included in the final design.
Fig 5. Preliminary sketch of the demo, including both main components: tilting platform and interactive weight.
 Fig 6. Frictional coefficient vs. step height on the ventral scale of the three investigated snake species [2]

Fig. 7 Bottom face of sanding block: 3D printed scales (left). Tilting platform in neutral position with felt surface,
tape guidelines, backstops and sanding block placed in resting position (center). Close up of scales at angle (right).
 Fig. 8 Macroscopic artificial scales for anisotropic friction scales for Nordic skis

Fig. 9 a) the California King snake, b) spectrometric view of ventral scale, observe the triangular
geometry and length to width ratio. (reference scale of 10 µm) , c) synthetic imitation (not relevant) d)
3D render of scale geometry and surface topography observe the prominence., [4].
Fig. 10 CAD Design of snake scales scaled up by a factor of 4550. Footprint is based on the size of the sanding
block Additional design feature is a hooked edge for convenient non-permanent attachment to the sanding block.
 Customer Ranking Mimics Robust Cost Material Simplicity
Requirement (1-5) Anisotropic
Friction

Elementary 5 ✓
understanding/
Education

Presentable/ 3 ✓ ✓
engaging

Durable 4 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

Demonstrates 5 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
biological
solution
effectively.

Interactive 2 ✓ ✓

Cost (200$ 4 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
budget)

Replaceable 4 ✓ ✓ ✓
Table I. Customer requirements vs. Engineering characteristics

Demo Identification Audience identification

Name: Snake Locomotion
Brief Description:
Displays properties of anisotropic friction that mimic
snake scales and the movement of snakes.
Main Features:
The demonstration will have a surface that shows high
degrees of friction in one direction compared to the
opposite direction.
Target audience: The zoo and the kids
Competitors: Other demonstrations
Skills required to use and understand:
- Features must be visible with naked eye.
- Must not require physics/ biology to understand.

Special features Financial requirements:

Non-essential features: - $200 - 250$
-Labels that show directions
-Markers that record maximum angles
-A spring to return the platform to a neutral position.

Key performance targets Life cycle targets

Main Engineering Characteristics: - Lasts ~ 2 years
-Friction coefficient (difference between forward and - Low maintenance, easy/cheap to fix.
reverse angles) - Consider removable parts that are expected to wear out
-Angle of slip. faster for improved replaceability.

Service environment Social, political, and legal requirements

- expect abrasion and wear. - Safety is the main concern
-expect high repetition - Ensure that all zoo visitors can experience demo (equity)
- consider replaceability factors

Physical description

Dimensions
Tilt platform: (~1’ x 2’)
Snake Scale model: (9’’ x 3’’)

Materials
3d printed plastics.
Felt interface material for scaled up roughness.

Weight
Relevant weight is weighed to supply normal force to
the model ( ~15 oz).

Table II. Design Specifications.

Table III. Friction coefficients of various species of snake in forward and reverse directions [7]
APPENDIX II: LIST OF PARTS

Description of Part Supplier Catalog/Supplier Number of Price of a Ordered

number items single item through
Gateway

GoldBlatt Drywall Amazon Goldblatt item model 1 $19.00 Yes

Sanding block #G05023

OMECAL Vaunn Amazon OMECAL Product 1 $46.99 Yes

Medical Bedside #B0876VYM86
Table

FabricLA Acrylic Amazon Heather Grey, Plain 1 yard $14.89 Yes

Felt weave pattern, solid
pattern Acrylic felt

5’’x7’’ Galvanized Home Internet #202344707 2 $0.52 No

Steel Flashing Depot Model #S57EA-200
Shingle Store SKU #980269

#12 x ¾’’ Self Home Store SKU #116040 1 box $10.57 No

Drilling Metal Depot
Roofing Screws
Table IV. Ordered Parts

Description of part Fabrication method Cost Estimate File name (for CAD)

Mock snake scale surface 3D printed $50 snakeskin.sldprt

with attachment modulus. Objet 30 Pro Printer
Table V. Fabricated Parts
WORKS CITED
[1] Abdel-Aal HA. Surface structure and tribology of legless squamate reptiles. J Mech
Behav Biomed Mater. 2018 Mar;79:354-398. doi: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2017.11.008. Epub
2017 Nov 8. PMID: 29352677.
[2] A. Trafton, “Coatings for shoe bottoms could improve traction on slick surfaces,” Jun.
01, 2020.
[3] M. J. Baum, L. Heepe, and S. N. Gorb, “Friction behavior of a microstructured polymer
surface inspired by snake skin,” Beilstein J. Nanotechnol., vol. 5, pp. 83–97, Jan. 2014,
doi: 10.3762/bjnano.5.8.
[4] J. M. Rieser, T.-D. Li, J. L. Tingle, D. I. Goldman, and J. R. Mendelson, “Functional
consequences of convergently evolved microscopic skin features on snake locomotion,”
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, vol. 118, no. 6, p. e2018264118, Feb. 2021, doi:
10.1073/pnas.2018264118.
[5] A. Rafsanjani, Y. Zhang, B. Liu, S. M. Rubinstein, and K. Bertoldi, “Kirigami skins
make a simple soft actuator crawl,” Sci. Robot., vol. 3, no. 15, p. eaar7555, Feb. 2018,
doi: 10.1126/scirobotics.aar7555.
[6] A. E. Filippov and S. N. Gorb, “Modelling of the frictional behaviour of the snake skin
covered by anisotropic surface nanostructures,” Sci Rep, vol. 6, no. 1, p. 23539, Sep.
2016, doi: 10.1038/srep23539.
[7] J. Hazel, M. Stone, M. S. Grace, and V. V. Tsukruk, “Nanoscale design of snake skin for
reptation locomotions via friction anisotropy,” Journal of Biomechanics, vol. 32, no. 5,
pp. 477–484, May 1999, doi: 10.1016/S0021-9290(99)00013-5.
[8] W. Wu et al., “Variation of the frictional anisotropy on ventral scales of snakes caused
by nanoscale steps,” Bioinspir. Biomim., vol. 15, no. 5, p. 056014, Aug. 2020, doi:
10.1088/1748-3190/ab9e51.